MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416125696 · doi:10.1111/jan.70380

Understanding the Second Year of the <scp>COVID</scp> ‐19 Pandemic From a Nursing Perspective: A Multi‐Country Descriptive Study

2025· article· en· W4416125696 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Allison Squires, Hillary J. Dutton, María Guadalupe Casales-Hernández, Javier Isidro Rodríguez López, Juana Jiménez-Sánchez, SangA Lee, Tae Wha Lee, Juliana Smichenko, Jakub Lickiewicz, Iwona Malinowska‐Lipień, Dulamsuren Damiran, Shanzida Khatun, Brigita Skela‐Savič, Maria Anyorikeya, Ho Yu Cheng, Derby Muñoz Rojas, Halyna Skipalska, Enkhjargal Yanjmaa, Theresa P. Castillo, Anna Zisberg, Raymond Aborigo, Larissa Burka, Lan Zhuo, Patrick Engel, Amal Mobarki, Simon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterYork University
KeywordsPandemicDescriptive researchCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakDescriptive statisticsPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM(S): To determine common and distinct factors experienced by nurses working in acute care settings during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: An online qualitative descriptive study with eight open-ended questions and a comprehensive demographic profile administered via the Qualtrics XM survey software. METHODS: Thirteen countries formed teams and led online data collection in their respective countries through various approaches. The data collection period occurred between January 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022. Descriptive thematic analysis was conducted in English (with translation), Spanish, and Korean to analyse the qualitative data. Descriptive statistics summarised the responses to the demographic profile. RESULTS: Worldwide, a final sample size of n = 1814 produced 6483 qualitative data points for analysis. The results identified ongoing occupational risk factors for nurses during the pandemic's second year, including mental health issues, yet showed some improvements in access to personal protective equipment and resources. Four themes emerged from the qualitative analysis, highlighting role changes, living states, and insights into the implementation of pandemic response measures. CONCLUSION: Despite individual occupational risks nurses described, structural factors associated with healthcare delivery produced common nursing experiences during the pandemic. Additionally, at least two distinct stages of pandemic response implementation were demarcated by treatment availability (e.g., vaccine development). IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: There is potential for common pandemic response policies for nurses, centered on specific factors, such as the increased provision of mental health support services by healthcare organisations. IMPACT: This study helped determine the common and distinct work experiences during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurses simultaneously experienced increased workload, role changes, perpetual fear and fatigue, daily hostility, and chaos in the implementation of pandemic responses. The results will impact nurses and those they serve along with future pandemic response policies. REPORTING METHOD: We have adhered to the SRQR reporting guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, or reporting.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207