Cited by 36COVID-19 and Mental HealthHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutResilience and Mental Health

Psychosocial Impact and Role of Resilience on Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic

Open access
Coco, Marinella, Guerrera, Claudia Savia, Santisi, Giuseppe, Riggio, Febronia, Grasso, Roberta, Di Corrado, Donatella, Di Nuovo, Santo, Ramaci, Tiziana·2021·Sustainability

Abstract

Italy was the first European country to be affected by the 2019 coronavirus epidemic (COVID-19). Several studies have shown the risk of developing depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder in medical and paramedical staff. Causes included the high contagiousness of the virus, the fear of contracting it, the lack of adequate personal protective equipment, and physical and psychological fatigue. In this context, resilience represents a protective factor against adversity and stress burden. The aim of this research was to investigate if and how the resilience and personality profile is able to influence the response to stress and anxiety on a sample of Italian healthcare workers, during the COVID-19 outbreak. The sample consisted of 152 frontline healthcare workers, physicians, and paramedical professionals. Participants completed the online questionnaire measuring the Resilience Scale for Adults, the Big Five Inventory-10 Item, the State Anxiety Inventory, and the Perceived Stress Scale. Analyses of data aimed to show differences in the stress of healthcare workers due to gender and professional role, and at finding, by means of multidimensional scaling, the relations among anxiety, stress, resilience, and traits of personality. The findings gave some suggestions for implementing strategies useful to increase the resilience in healthcare workers and support them to cope with stressful events, typical of the pandemic emergency.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su13137096

Cites

42 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • During the COVID-19 pandemic there was an increase in perceived stress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and sleep disturbances, particularly in students, women, young people, and healthcare professionals, with medium- and long-term effects.

    “Indeed, during the COVID-19 pandemic there was an increase in perceived stress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and sleep disturbances, particularly in students, women, young people, and healthcare professionals, with medium- and long-term effects [6,7,8].”

    From Impact of Stress during COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy: A Study on Dispositional and Behavioral Dimensions for Supporting Evidence-Based Targeted Strategies (2024) · cites this paper as [6]

    The Results report high perceived stress and anxiety among frontline healthcare workers, with higher levels in women; the Discussion also reports depression and insomnia among healthcare workers during COVID-19. The paper does not establish an increase from before the pandemic, identify students or young people as particularly affected, or demonstrate medium- or long-term effects. The indexed passages have section labels but no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Cohen, S.; Kessler, R.C.; Gordon, L.U. Perceived Stress Scale. Measuring Stress: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA; Oxford, UK, 1997.
  2. Perdighe, C.; Cosentino, T.; Faraci, P.; Gragnani, A.; Saliani, A.; Mancini, F. Individual differences in guilt sensitivity: The Guilt Sensitivity Scale (GSS). Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 22, 349-362. [CrossRef · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coco, M., Guerrera, C. S., Santisi, G., Riggio, F., Grasso, R., Di Corrado, D., Di Nuovo, S., & Ramaci, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Catania (IT)
  • Department of Human and Social Sciences, Kore University of Enna, 94100 Enna, Italy
  • Department of Educational Sciences, University of Catania, 95121 Catania, Italy
  • Università degli Studi di Enna Kore (IT)
Corresponding author
Coco, Marinella
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-06-24
Volume
13
Issue
13
Pages
7096
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3174284997
Cited by
36
References
48
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3
FWCI
5.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers, resilience, psychosocial impact, anxiety, perceived stress, personality traits, Big Five personality traits, frontline physicians, paramedical staff, gender differences, professional roles, coping strategies, Italy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review