Author: Ignacio Ricci Cabello; Jose F Meneses Echavez; Maria Jesus Serrano-Ripoll; David Fraile-Navarro; Maria Antonia Fiol de Roque; Guadalupe Pastor Moreno; Adoracion Castro; Isabel Ruiz Perez; Rocio Zamanillo Campos; Daniela Goncalves-Bradley
Title: Impact of viral epidemic outbreaks on mental health of healthcare workers: a rapid systematic review Document date: 2020_4_6
ID: 0vecbxny_22
Snippet: We used the GRADE approach 22 to assess the quality of evidence related to the outcomes included in this rapid review. We used GRADEpro 2011 23 software to create 'Summary of findings' tables. For assessments of the overall quality of evidence for each outcome that included pooled data, we downgraded the evidence from 'high quality' by one level for serious, or by two levels for very serious, study limitations (risk of bias), indirectness of evid.....
Document: We used the GRADE approach 22 to assess the quality of evidence related to the outcomes included in this rapid review. We used GRADEpro 2011 23 software to create 'Summary of findings' tables. For assessments of the overall quality of evidence for each outcome that included pooled data, we downgraded the evidence from 'high quality' by one level for serious, or by two levels for very serious, study limitations (risk of bias), indirectness of evidence, inconsistency, imprecision of effect estimates, or potential publication bias. 22
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- bias risk and evidence overall quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and evidence overall quality assessment: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- bias risk and grade approach: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and high quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and high quality evidence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and overall quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and potential publication bias: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
- bias risk and publication bias: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- bias risk and study limitation: 1, 2, 3, 4
- effect estimate and evidence overall quality: 1
- effect estimate and grade approach: 1, 2, 3, 4
- effect estimate and high quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
- effect estimate and high quality evidence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- effect estimate and overall quality: 1, 2, 3
- effect estimate and potential publication bias: 1
- effect estimate and publication bias: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
- effect estimate and study limitation: 1, 2
- evidence overall quality and overall quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- evidence overall quality and publication bias: 1, 2, 3
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date