MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408411360 · doi:10.1186/s40359-025-02536-z

Influence of the pandemic on the mental health of professional workers

2025· article· en· W4408411360 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jelena Atanackovic, Henrietta Akuamoah-Boateng, Jungwee Park, Melissa Corrente, Ivy Lynn Bourgeault

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaImpactUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPandemicPsychologyMental healthPsychological researchCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Applied psychologyCriminologySocial psychologyPsychiatryMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study focuses on the influence of the pandemic on professional workers from an explicitly comparative perspective. High levels of stress and burnout have been reported among professional workers pre-pandemic, but the pandemic has had unique consequences for certain professional workers. Gender has emerged as a particularly important factor. While the existing research yields important insights of mental health concerns among professional workers, there is a need for more research that examines these impacts empirically, explicitly from a comparative perspective across professions taking gender more fully into consideration. METHODS: This paper undertakes a secondary data analysis of two different pan Canadian sources to address the pandemic impact on professional workers: The Canadian Community Health Survey (2020, 2021) administered by Statistics Canada and the Healthy Professional Worker survey (2021). Across the two datasets, we focused on the following professional workers - academics, accountants, dentists, nurses, physicians and teachers - representing a range of work settings and gender composition. Inferential statistics analyses were conducted to provide prevalence rates of self-perceived worsened mental health since the pandemic and to examine the inter-group differences. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of these two data sources revealed a significant effect of the pandemic on the mental health of professional workers, that there were differences across professional workers and that gender had a notable effect both at the individual and professional level. This included significant differences in self-reported mental health, distress, burnout and presenteeism prior to and during the pandemic, as well as the overall impact of the pandemic on mental health. The high levels of distress and burnout during the pandemic were particularly evident in nursing, teaching, and midwifery - professions where women predominate. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to address the mental health consequences of the pandemic, including their unique gendered and professional dimensions, should consider the intersecting influences and differences revealed through our analysis. In addition to being gender sensitive, interventions need to take into account the unique circumstances of each profession to better respond to the mental health needs of all genders within each professional group.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.412 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychologySame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207