Global analysis of the COVID-19 research landscape and scientific impact.

OBJECTIVES: To consider a 1-year time window of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis to integrate qualitative and quantitative data and provide an in-depth analysis of all COVID-19 publications from geographical, epidemiological and chronological perspectives. METHODS: Publications on COVID-19 from December 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020 without document type limitations were extracted from the Web of Science database. Microsoft Excel 2016, GraphPad Prism 9, VOSviewer 1.6.15 and IBM SPSS 21.0 were used to analyze the global epidemiological publication landscape and its correlations, research hotspots around the world and the top 5 countries in terms of publications. RESULTS: A total of 51,317 documents were analyzed in the present study. The publication trend could be divided into an increasing output stage and an explosive output stage. There were positive correlations between monthly publications, confirmed cases and deaths. Research hotspots from the whole year, from individual quarters, and from the top 5 countries with the most publications were further identified. CONCLUSIONS: The correlation analysis of publications indicated that confirmed cases and deaths were forces driving the scientific output, reflecting the growing trend to some extent. Moreover, the hotspot analysis provided valuable information for scientists, funders, policy and decision-makers to determine what areas should be their focus when faced with public health emergencies in the future.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Psychological Status in Different Epidemic Areas in China After the COVID-19 Outbreak.

Background: The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China has seriously affected people's mental health. We aimed to assess the psychological impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 on health care workers and non-health care workers in three different epidemic areas in China and to identify independent risk factors. Methods: We surveyed 1,020 non-health care workers and 480 health care workers in Wuhan, other cities in Hubei except Wuhan and other provinces in China except Hubei. Results: Health care workers in Hubei had higher levels of anxiety and depression than non-health care workers (p < 0.05), but there was no such difference in other provinces in China except Hubei (p > 0.05). Compared with other regions, health care workers in Wuhan was more anxious (p < 0.05), and this anxiety may be caused by concerns about occupational exposure and wearing protective clothing for a long time daily; health care workers in Hubei had more obvious depression (p < 0.05), which may be associated with long days participating in epidemic work and wearing protective clothing for a long time daily. Meanwhile, 62.5% of health care workers were proud of their work. The anxiety and depression of non-health care workers in Wuhan were also the most serious. Conclusions: In Wuhan, where the epidemic is most severe, levels of anxiety and depression seem to be higher, especially among health care workers. This information may help to better prepare for future events.