fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #1

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORT

published: 09 November 2020
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.574712

Intervention and Improved

Well-Being of Basic Science
Researchers During the COVID 19
Era: A Case Study
Santosh Kumar 1* , Sunitha Kodidela 1 , Asit Kumar 1 , Kelli Gerth 1 and Kaining Zhi 2
1
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis,
TN, United States, 2 The Plough Center of Drug Delivery Solutions, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis,
TN, United States

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected individuals of all

categories, irrespective of their geographical locations, professions, gender, or race.
As a result of full or partial lock-down and stay-at-home orders, the well-being
and productivity of individuals were severely affected. Since basic science research
requires laboratory experiments, the work-from-home strategy hurt their productivity.
In addition, the combination of decreased productivity and staying at home is likely to
Edited by: compromise their well-being by causing stress and anxiety. In this case study, a strategy
Andrzej Klimczuk, was developed to engage researchers through listening and learning, motivation, and
Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
empowerment, using regular virtual sessions. Through these virtual sessions, research
Reviewed by:
Martin Thomas Falk,
work was prioritized and coordinated, from idea conception to writing research papers
University of South-Eastern Norway, and grant proposals. Perceived stress scores (PSS) and COVID-19-related stress
Norway
(COVID-SS) scores were measured to evaluate general and COVID-19-induced stress,
Mohammad Amiryousefi,
University of Isfahan, Iran respectively, every month from March to July 2020 during the COVID-19 era. The
*Correspondence: result showed a significant improvement in both the PSS and the COVID-SS scores
Santosh Kumar of the intervention group compared to the control group. In addition, while there was
ksantosh@uthsc.edu
no/minimal change in PSS and COVID-SS scores from March to subsequent months
Specialty section: until July for the control group, the intervention groups showed significant and consistent
This article was submitted to improvement in both scores in the intervention group. Overall, the intervention strategy
Organizational Psychology,
a section of the journal showed improved well-being for basic science researchers, which was also consistent
Frontiers in Psychology with their improved productivity during the COVID-19 era.
Received: 06 July 2020
Keywords: COVID-19, productivity, perceived stress score, laboratory research, well-being
Accepted: 16 October 2020
Published: 09 November 2020
Citation: INTRODUCTION
Kumar S, Kodidela S, Kumar A,
Gerth K and Zhi K (2020) Intervention
The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic is an ongoing world crisis. This pandemic has
and Improved Well-Being of Basic
Science Researchers During the
taken a toll on human health and has also placed a huge burden on economies, societies, and
COVID 19 Era: A Case Study. families across the globe (Carter et al., 2020; Cutler, 2020; Donthu and Gustafsson, 2020; Hua et al.,
Front. Psychol. 11:574712. 2020; Jenson, 2020; Mclaren et al., 2020; Ornell et al., 2020; Power, 2020; Satiani et al., 2020). This
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.574712 COVID-19 crisis is further deepened because the future of countries, societies, and individuals is

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #2

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

uncertain and unpredictable in the months and perhaps years to intervention and well-being of basic science researchers at the
come. A recent special issue on COVID-19 by “Taloy and Francis” University of Tennessee Health Science Center (UTHSC).
describes the impact of this pandemic on, “Emerging markets Research laboratories at UTHSC were closed for all non-
finance and trade,” which ultimately causes stress in world emergency work in March, and the researchers were asked to
economies and societies (Taylor and Francis, 2020). In addition work from home (UTHSC, 2020). Although manuscripts and
to the impact on world economies, world trade has experienced grant writing could be done from home, it is very difficult to
a massive contraction as a result of a drastic reduction in trade stay productive if experiments in the basic science laboratory are
connectivity and commercial activities among countries during completely stalled. Basic science experiments take 1–2 weeks to
COVID-19 outbreak (Vidya and Prabheesh, 2020). The trade wrap up and equally the same time to restart. Thus, until the
forecast among the major trading countries further Shows a research laboratories partially opened in the first week of June,
decline until December 2020. However, it is worth mentioning employees had lost 3 months of complete followed by 2 months
that amid the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a significant (June–July) of partial basic science research. In addition to
improvement in air quality, though temporarily, and a positive reduced productivity, the work-from-home plan for researchers
macroeconomic response has been seen in some countries such who normally work in a laboratory setting can increase stress
as China and India during the COVID-19 outbreak (Ming et al., and anxiety. Compounded by COVID-19-related stress, this has
2020). The impact on global economies and loss of millions of the potential to further reduce productivity. Moreover, due to
jobs have been one of the major causes of stress and anxiety uncertainty surrounding lab reopening dates, researchers were
among global populations. also uncertain about their career progression. All these factors
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human health, may contribute to a lack of concentration, irritability, insomnia,
which caused ⇠38 million infections and >1 million deaths and reduced productivity among scholars.
world-wide as of October 15, 2020, far exceeds the impact of The objective of the present study is to design an
previous epidemics or pandemics in recent history (Coronavirus- interventional strategy to mitigate stress and maintain well-being
Resources-Center, 2020). Although over 90% of people recovered and productivity for basic science researchers during the work-
from the infection/disease, many individuals suffered from from-home order in the COVID-19 era. The mitigation strategy
multiple organ damage (lungs, kidney, liver, heart, etc.) (Renu is to plan and implement necessary experiments during the pre-
et al., 2020; Spuntarelli et al., 2020). Further, a large number lock-down period, followed by engaging in idea development,
of recovered populations from COVID-19 also suffered from data analysis, and manuscript writing, as well as engaging in
mental and psychological diseases/conditions such as stress, listening and empowering sessions via virtual lab meetings
anxiety, and depression (Salari et al., 2020; Xiong et al., 2020). during and after the lock-down periods. The hypothesis is
Studies have shown that ⇠50% of individuals who recovered that the interventional strategy will significantly reduce stress
from COVID-19 are diagnosed with depression, and ⇠40% and improve the well-being of basic science researchers while
are diagnosed with anxiety and stress (Rogers et al., 2020). maintaining their productivity. To assess the well-being of
Individuals associated with COVID-19 patients, and others, subjects, Perceived Stress Score (PSS) and COVID-19-related
especially those who have lost their jobs and are experiencing stress scores (COVID-SS) were measured. Generally, the stress
financial crises, also show symptoms of depression, anxiety, and levels of health care professionals and college students are
stress (Dubey et al., 2020; Titov et al., 2020). measured using the PSS method (Du et al., 2020; Georgiou et al.,
This is the first time in modern history that almost all 2020; Guo et al., 2020; Meira et al., 2020; Zarghami et al., 2020),
countries, either fully or partially, enter into a lock-down phase which is the most widely used method to monitor perceived stress
and enforce stay-at-home orders (Asensio et al., 2020). One of (New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services, 2020).
the major health concerns, as a result of lock-down and stay- However, to measure the stress, anxiety, and overall well-being
at-home orders, is the mental health of individuals who stay at of individuals specifically induced by COVID-19-related changes
or work from home (Killgore et al., 2020). Stress and anxiety in lifestyle and altered productivity, the PSS method may not
are usual reactions to any unpredictable pandemic situation. be sufficient. Therefore, we used the COVID-19 stress related
As a result of stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the score (COVID-SS) to assess the fear, learning, and growth in
general population, particularly health care professionals and knowledge of individuals during the pandemic (Epilepsy Society,
college students, experienced changes in concentration, anxiety, 2020). The current study results suggest an improved well-being
irritability, and eventually reduced productivity (Tangen et al., of the intervention group compared to the control group, which is
1981; Kecojevic et al., 2020; Ozamiz-Etxebarria et al., 2020; also consistent with the reduced stress and improved productivity
Stanton et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2020). These studies suggest a need of the intervention group.
to develop mitigation and psychological intervention strategies
that can improve the mental health of the general population
during the COVID-19 era, especially in vulnerable groups such METHODS
as health professionals and college students. To the best of our
knowledge, there is no study conducted among basic science Preparation Before the Crisis for
researchers to examine the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic Intervention Group
on psychological health and stress or the relationship of these When the WHO declared COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency
factors to productivity. Therefore, we conducted a case study on of International Concern on 30 January 2020 (Patel et al., 2020),

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #3

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

a strategic plan for researchers in our group was put-together. (4) Safety vs. Carelessness: The intervention group was
The strategic plan included: (1) postponing manuscript writing educated to exercise safety and caution by following
and other paper work and performing wet-lab experiments to the COVID-19 policies and guidelines of national and
obtain data until the lab was closed in the second week of March, local organizations.
(2) data analysis and manuscript writing during the work-from- (5) Managing the crisis vs. Getting under the crisis: The
home orders from mid-March to May 31 and until July 31 intervention group discussed various aspects of the crisis
during partial lab-closure, (3) conceiving new ideas and writing and how one can manage the crisis, rather than getting
manuscripts for review papers, as well as writing grant proposals under the crisis, in a way that negatively impacts us.
for the same periods. To make the researchers accountable for (6) Thriving vs. Surviving: Finally, the intervention group
their productivity, a 2 h virtual lab meeting every Monday and discussed how to thrive during the crisis and not just
one-on-one virtual meetings as needed were implemented. The survive. As Stanford economist Paul Romer once stated,
demographics of the intervention group was 4 men and 5 women “a crisis is a terrible thing to waste” (Chisholm-Burns,
that included 3 students, 2 post-doctorate fellows, 3 research 2010). The intervention group as a whole decided, “we
staffs, and 1 faculty. The study population was generally healthy will not let the crisis go to waste.” The group discussed
and their age ranged approximately from 22 to 50 years. Since the various ways to improve productivity and manage stress
intervention requires a certain supervisory relationship among during the crisis. For example, ways to improve grit and
all participants, it is not feasible to increase group size. Inviting mental toughness by acquiring positive attitudes and self-
researchers from other research groups may result in a conflict of discipline were discussed. Besides, performing physical
interest among principle investigators since most research groups and mental activities, such as walking/running/exercising,
are independent. Hence, we could include only nine people in the yoga, and meditation were promoted in group discussion.
intervention group.
In addition to the above empowering sessions, the
intervention group also discussed the following advantages
Implementation During the Crisis of working from home.
A modified anonymous strategy was used as an intervention.
(1) Freedom: freedom to work with a chosen time,
Almost half of each lab meeting until May 31 was spent in
place, and uniform.
listening to everyone’s concerns, celebrating any good news, and
(2) Family together: opportunity to spend quality and quantity
COVID-19-related facts from reliable sources. The frequency of
time with families.
these discussions was reduced when the laboratory was partially
(3) Time to think creatively: compared to lab and office
opened from June 1 to July 31. In general, the strategy was
environments, work-from-home may give a change in
to learn from each other and empower each other. During the
environment, more time, and quietude to think creatively.
laboratory meetings, some engaging games were also played to
(4) Yoga and Meditation: a home environment may empower
overcome stress. The empowering sessions were developed based
people to do yoga and meditation to maintain physical
on vast knowledge, emotional intelligence, and the experience
and mental health.
of our diverse group, as well as available literatures (World
(5) Opportunity to take care of the backlog, start new writing
Health Organization, 2004; Shultz et al., 2016; Hendriks et al.,
projects, and contribute to society: working from home
2017; Seyedin et al., 2019; Jiménez et al., 2020; Schlesselman
may give more time for data analysis, writing manuscripts,
et al., 2020). We compiled the following discussion topics to
and initiating new projects for review papers and/or grant
empower each other.
proposals. It can also motivate and empower society, which
is going through a difficult time, through messages via
(1) COVID-DIFFERENTIATOR (COVID-DIFF): Similar to reliable sources.
any crisis, COVID would differentiate people into three
categories: (1) Individuals who were negatively impacted Finally, as a group and as individuals, the intervention group
(with no mistake of theirs), (2) individuals who stayed the did reflection exercises on the following things. (1) How have I
course and were able to handle well, and (3) individuals contributed positivity or negativity to others? (2) Does someone
who found new opportunities and improved performance. feel better after an interaction with me vs. how they felt before?
In general, most people, including our study participants, (3) Did shared interest rise above self-interest? (4) Did I listen
belong to categories 1 and 2. Our goal was to empower more – or talk more? (5) How many times today did I complain
them with the below mentioned strategies, which could about someone or something? (6) How many times did I simply
help them to move to category 3. say thank you? (7) What did I learn this week, especially that
(2) Faith/dreams vs. Panic/fear: The intervention group challenged my thought processes? (8) What did I do this week,
discussed the pros and cons of having faith/dreams especially that is unique and out-of-norms?
vs. feeling panic/fear, with numerous examples. These
empowered each other to have faith and dreams. Control Group
(3) Facts/reality vs. Opinion/hype: The intervention group was A control group of UTHSC basic science researchers, which
advised to follow facts and reality and educate others with did not go through the intervention as described above, is
these rather than uncorroborated opinions and hype. included in this study. The control group consists of 6 students,

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #4

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

3 post-doctorate fellows, and 1 research scientist (5 men and 5 TABLE 1 | Statements used to score COVID-SS for each zone. Each correct
statement carries 1 point.
women). The participants were generally healthy and their age
ranged approximately from 25 to 40 years. The control group of Fear zone (total 5 Knowledge zone (total Growth zone (total 8
basic science researchers also went through similar challenges at points) 7 points) points)
UTHSC due to complete lab-closure from mid-March to May 31
I grab food, medications, I start to give up what I I think of others and know
and partial lab-closure from June 1 to July 31.
and toilet paper that I can’t control how to help them
don’t need
I spread emotions related I stop consuming what I make my talents
OUTCOME MEASURES to fear and anger hurts me, from food to available to those who
news need them
Two outcomes were measured during the 5-month period. I complain frequently I identify my emotions I live in the present and
The PSS and COVID-SS outcomes were measured by using focus on the future
their respective surveys upon an Institutional Review Board I forward all messages I I am aware about the I am empathetic to myself
(IRB) approval from the University of Tennessee Health receive about COVID-19 situations and know how and to others
Science Center. to act
I get mad easily I evaluate information I thank and appreciate
before spreading false others
Perceived Stress Score (PSS) I recognize that we all are I keep a happy emotional
The PSS of nine participants from the intervention group and trying to do our best state and give hope
ten participants from the control group for the months of I look for a way to adapt
March–July were measured, upon their consent to do a volunteer to changes
survey. PSS is the most-widely used method to measure stress I practice quietude,
levels in occupational health, especially among professional patience, relationships,
students in health science. This method was essentially used and creativity

as described (New Hampshire Department of Administrative

Services, 2020). In brief, PSS was measured by self-scoring the
following questions. Scoring was performed (between 0 and 4; Research Productivity
0 being never and 4 being very often), followed by reversing Our mitigation and empowering strategies were likely to
the scores of questions 4, 5, 7, and 8, and then adding all improve the research productivity. It was measured only in
the scores. Scores with 0–13, 14–26, and 27–40 are defined as our intervention study group in terms of conceiving ideas,
low, moderate, and high stress, respectively. The group PSS data analysis, manuscript writing and submission, manuscript
scores were then analyzed longitudinally for the months of acceptance, and publication, as well as grant submission.
April–July, using March as control month, as the intervention
began in April. COVID-SS scores for the intervention group Statistical Analysis
were also compared and analyzed from the control group for Mean ± SEM was calculated and compared to the control group.
each month. Student’s T-test was applied to compare the scores between the
intervention and control groups, as well as between the control
COVID-19-Related Stress Scores month (April) and individual intervention months (April–July)
(COVID-SS) for both control and intervention groups. All the statistical
The COVID-SS of nine intervention participants and ten control calculations were performed using GraphPad Prism 7. p < 0.05
participants for the months of March–July were also measured was considered statistically significant.
upon their consent to do a volunteer survey. COVID-SS is a
new method that used to assess the stress level of participants
during the COVID-19 era using their behaviors and actions in RESULTS
three zones (fear, knowledge, and growth). This method was
essentially used as described previously (Manch, 2020). In brief, Perceived Stress Score (PSS)
the questions/statements, as presented in Table 1, were used An intervention group of nine participants and a control
to self-assess the three zones: fear, knowledge, and a growth group of ten participants volunteered to take the perceived
mindset. Every correct statement for each zone carries one stress test, as described in the outcomes measure section. The
point. The total points for each zone represent the mindsets Mean ± SD of the PSS were evaluated, and the relative scores
and attitudes of participants in terms of COVID-19-related fear, of the intervention group vs. control group were analyzed.
knowledge, and growth. The information obtained from these Comparison and analysis were also performed in a longitudinal
zones can then be correlated with COVID-19-induced stress and manner, in which March was a control month when the
overall well-being of participants. The group COVID-SS scores intervention began (Figure 1). Overall, results showed a relatively
were then analyzed longitudinally for the months of April-July, high PSS (17.4 ± 2.7) for the intervention group in March,
using March as the control month, as the intervention began in which consistently decreased in the subsequent months, with a
April. The COVID-SS scores for the intervention group were also statistically significant decrease in June (13.8 ± 2.3) (Figure 1A).
compared and analyzed from the control group for each month. However, the PSS scores did not significantly change in the

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #5

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

FIGURE 1 | (A) Mean ± SD of Perceived Stress Score (PSS) of control (n = 10) and Intervention (n = 9) groups for March to July. (B) Mean ± SD of overall PSS of
control (n = 50, 10 subjects for 5 months) and intervention (n = 45, 9 subjects for 5 months) groups. T-test was applied to compare the scores between intervention
and control groups. p < 0.05, p < 0.01 are represented as “*” and “**”, respectively when compared the scores between intervention and control groups. “#”
represents p < 0.05 when compared between intervention groups (March vs. other months). “$” represents p < 0.05 when compared between control groups
(March vs. other months).

control group from the months March to July. Importantly, (3.33 ± 0.47) (Figure 2C). Similarly, the COVID-SS for the
there was a statistically significant decrease in the overall growth zone also steadily increased from March to July, with
PSS scores (March-July combined) of the intervention group a statistically significant increase in May (6.67 ± 0.41), June
compared to the control group (14.7 ± 0.8 vs.19.3 ± 0.3) (7.01 ± 0.16), and July (7.10 ± 0.26) compared to March
(Figure 1B). In general, the intervention group showed an (4.44 ± 0.62) (Figure 2E). On the other hand, compared to
increased stress level (moderate stress) in March, which was march, COVID-SS scores of the control group in the fear
subsequently decreased to low stress in the subsequent months. zone did not statistically change in the subsequent months
However, the stress level in the control group remained moderate (Figure 2A). However, compared to March, COVID-SS scores in
throughout these 5 months. Since the PSS method is used July significantly increased in both knowledge (4.80 ± 0.49 vs.
to measure general stress levels, in the following section we 1.27 ± 0.42) (Figure 2C) and growth (6.01 ± 0.75 vs. 2.26 ± 0.75)
used COVID-19-related stress scores in our participants and zones (Figure 2E), perhaps due to partial opening of the lab.
determined whether intervention group had a significantly However, this increase in the knowledge and growth zones for
different stress level. the control group was relatively lower than that of the respective
increase in the intervention group.
COVID-19-Related Stress Scores More importantly, COVID-SS scores of the intervention
(COVID-SS) group in the fear zone were significantly lower than the control
COVID-SS measures three different components (fear, group in May (0.33 ± 0.22 vs. 1.47 ± 0.49) and July (0.33 ± 0.33
knowledge, and growth zones) as described in the outcomes vs. 1.65 ± 0.55) (Figure 2A). On the other hand, COVID-
measure section. This method was used specifically to measure SS scores of the intervention group in knowledge zone were
COVID-19-related stress and anxiety. COVID-SS examines significantly higher than the control group in May (5.33 ± 0.23
whether participants can change their behavior and actions vs. 1.13 ± 0.38) (Figure 2C). Similarly, COVID-SS scores of the
as a result of training and move from the fear zone to the intervention group in growth zone were also significantly higher
knowledge zone, and ultimately the growth zone, across the 5 than the control group in May (6.67 ± 0.47 vs. 1.95 ± 0.65)
months. Nine participants from the intervention group and ten and June (7.01 ± 0.16 vs. 1.90 ± 0.63) months (Figure 2E).
participants from the control group took the COVID-19-related We also analyzed the overall COVID-SS scores for each zone
stress test survey. The Mean ± SD of COVID-SS was evaluated for the months of March-July for both intervention and control
for each zone during the months of March–July. The results groups. The overall COVID-SS scores of the intervention group
from nine intervention participants showed a relatively high in the fear zone were significantly lower than the control group
COVID-SS for the fear zone (1.78 ± 0.52) in March, which (0.75 ± 0.26 vs. 1.74 ± 0.08) (Figure 2B). On the other hand,
subsequently decreased in April, with a statistically significant the overall COVID-SS scores of the intervention group in the
decrease in May (0.33 ± 0.23), June (0.55 ± 0.24), and July knowledge zone were significantly higher than the control group
(0.33 ± 0.23) (Figure 2A). On the other hand, the COVID-SS (4.80 ± 0.43 vs. 4.18 ± 0.21) (Figure 2D). Similarly, overall
for the knowledge zone steadily increased from March to July, COVID-SS scores of the intervention group in the growth zone
with a statistically significant increase in May (5.23 ± 0.23), were also significantly higher than the control group (6.13 ± 0.51
June (5.33 ± 0.37), and July (5.66 ± 0.37) compared to March vs. 4.88 ± 0.40) (Figure 2F). Taken together, these findings

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #6

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

FIGURE 2 | The COVID-related stress score (COVID-SS) in the fear zone (A,B), knowledge zone (C,D), and growth zone (E,F) for March, April, May, June, and July
were collected and compared between control (n = 10) and intervention (n = 9) groups. The scores of intervention and control groups in March were also compared
to their respective scores of intervention and control groups in other months in each zone. The data in (B,D,F) represent Mean ± SD of overall COVID-SS scores of
control (n = 50, 10 subjects for 5 months) and intervention (n = 45, 9 subjects for 5 months) groups. T-test was applied to compare the scores between months.
p < 0.05, p < 0.01 are represented as “*” and “**” or “***”, respectively when compared the scores between intervention and control groups. “#” represents p < 0.05
when compared between intervention groups (March vs. other months). “$” represents p < 0.05 when compared between control groups (March vs. another month).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #7

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

suggest that intervention strategy to deal with COVID-related on, “Challenges with COVID-19 could bring transformational
stress and anxiety significantly and consistently decreased the change, improve human health,” in which, a scientific opinion
fear and increased the knowledge and subsequent growth in on how COVID-19 could help improve general immunity and
their knowledge. reduce the prevalence of chronic diseases was provided.

Productivity During the COVID-19 Era

It is widely known that reduced stress enhances productivity, DISCUSSION
and increased productivity feeds into low stress and improved
well-being (Anderzén and Arnetz, 2005; Heylighen and Vidal, The present study was designed to mitigate general as well as
2008). Stress and productivity work as a loop that feed into COVID-19-induced stress in basic science researchers, which
each other. Therefore, the research productivity was measured subsequently helps to improve the overall well-being and
in terms of conceiving new ideas for a review paper, data productivity in the intervention group. We used both PSS
analysis for the original paper, and manuscript writing and their and COVID-SS methods to measure their stress levels and
publication in peer-reviewed journals. Since the evidence for only correlated the improved well-being of the intervention group
published papers can be provided, the productivity metrics for with their productivity. Overall, findings strongly suggest that the
only published papers are presented in Table 2. Briefly, the data mitigation strategy resulted in reduced stress levels and increased
from a project (Table 2) was analyzed, which was later written and research productivity among basic science researchers during the
published. Two other manuscripts for original articles were also COVID-19 pandemic. However, the data from the control group
revised and published during the same time-period. In addition suggests that the current COVID-19 pandemic has a significant
to original articles, 7 review papers and 1 editorial were published impact on the mental health of basic science researchers, which
between March and the first week of September (Table 2). Two of is consistent with the impact on mental health in the general
these review papers are from the field of COVID-19 for which we population, especially in health care professionals and college
conceived the idea of the paper during the COVID-19 era. students (Tangen et al., 1981; Kecojevic et al., 2020; Ozamiz-
For the past 5 years, the average peer-reviewed publication Etxebarria et al., 2020; Stanton et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2020).
rate for the group is 8 per year. Thus, publishing 11 papers Overall, the intervention group showed reduced general stress
in 6 months can be considered higher than the previous compared to the control group. Our outcome is different from
productivity for this research group. It has been widely accepted the outcomes derived from the perceived stress and anxiety
that obtaining data is the most time-consuming step and requires in the general population, in which this pandemic increased
significant manpower. However, in the absence of experiments, anxiety levels. In one study, high PSS scores among the
optimal priorities and time management were implemented to general population were observed in women, persons under
maximize productivity with an overall exceptional result. The age 30, students, and those who believed themselves to be
productivity is also considered unique, since two review articles at a greater risk of contracting the illness (Limcaoco et al.,
were published on the much-needed field of COVID-19. 2020). Additionally, participants’ perception of susceptibility to
In addition to scientific papers, two opinion columns on COVID-19 was likely affected by several factors. Participants
COVID-19 were published in the Memphis-based “Commercial were not elderly or in other high-risk groups. Further, a certain
Appeal,” the “USA Today” network, on April 13 (Kumar, 2020b) level of scientific literacy (undergraduate and above) may have
and on June 11 (Kumar, 2020a). The former opinion column equipped the researchers to practice appropriate COVID-related
was on, “University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center making health measures and mitigate COVID-related fear. Moreover,
strides in treating COVID-19,” in which, a scientific opinion on upon comparing with the control group, which were of similar
repurposing antiviral drugs was provided. The latter one was demographics, ages, and education levels, it can be said that the

TABLE 2 | Number of manuscripts written and published during the months of March–July.

PMID/DOI/In press Type of paper Idea Data analysis Manuscript submission Revision submission Published

PMID 32481515 Original article X X X X

PMID 32443728 Original article X X
PMID: 32433651 Original article X X
PMID 32696265 Editorial X X
PMID 32357553 Review X X X X
EIDDJ-100021 Review X X X X
PMID: 32722629 Review X X X
PMID: 32823684 Review X X X X
doi: 10.1080/23808993.2020.1812382 Review X X
PMID: 32842791 Review X X
PMID: 32932786 Review X X X

“X” Represent completed task in that particular section.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #8

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

strategy to deal with stress during the COVID-19 era has helped found more vulnerable to high psychological distress during the
to manage stress levels of the researchers. outbreak of equine influenza in Australia (Taylor et al., 2008),
Intervention study based on the psychological health whereas an opposite trend is seen in China (Qiu et al., 2020).
status of researchers as backline workers could provide a Since PSS data is a test for well-being in general conditions, and it
potential statewide measure that could be used by other may be biased for stress induced by COVID-19, another method
researchers or even frontline workers to cope with stress that measured COVID-SS was used.
during the pandemic outbreak. However, stress assessment The present study findings suggest that the intervention
and outcome measurements used in our study will be more strategy to deal with COVID-related stress and anxiety
appropriate for stress management and wellbeing of the mental significantly and consistently decreased the fear and increased the
state among researchers. Inconsistent with our findings, the knowledge and subsequent growth in their knowledge. This is a
frontline health care professionals, who were working in new test that used for the first time to evaluate fear, knowledge,
proximity to patients admitted in the ICU with severe lung and growth mindsets in researchers during the COVID-19 era.
infections, experienced mental health problems with substantial Thus, it is not feasible to directly compare these outcomes with
psychological distress (Greenberg et al., 2020). A descriptive others in the literature that used different tests. This outcome
study that was performed on health care professionals during measurement was used specifically in the context as an innovative
COVID-19 revealed a relatively moderate level of perceived strategy to help manage stress and increase productivity among
stress (PSS mean = 15.71 ± 4.02) on PSS-10, along with 38% researchers. Recent studies evaluated mental health associated
identified as depressed and 24% as suffering from anxiety. Health with COVID-19-mediated stress and anxiety in the general
care professionals who experience higher perceived stress than population (Liu et al., 2020; Shammi et al., 2020), as well as in
others likely worked at intensive care units (ICUs) (Ma et al., health workers who were involved in the treatment of COVID-
2020). Findings of a meta-analysis indicated a high psychological 19 patients (Bohlken et al., 2020; Yin et al., 2020). The outcomes
impact, not only on healthcare workers (HCW) and patients, from all those studies showed a significant decrease in their
but also in the general population (Luo et al., 2020; Pappa et al., mental health as measured by the prevalence and predictors
2020). The psychological distress was mediated by anxiety and of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and other methods.
depression. However, the existence of other variables could be The participants in those studies experienced high stress and
wrongly predicted as stress associated with COVID 19. anxiety, lack of sleep, and uncertainty in their future. Thus, unlike
In a cross-sectional study conducted on frontline nurses other reports, outcomes from the current study with significant
(n = 325), 123 nurses were found to have a dysfunctional level improvement in mental health suggest that the strategy to
of anxiety that involves fear, behavior, and psychological distress manage the stress of researchers appears to be effective. However,
(Labrague and De Los Santos, 2020; Lee, 2020). Studies conducted it is important to note that participants were at low risk of
on the psychological impact of COVID-19 on frontline nurses becoming unemployed and were not otherwise economically
have found an overall high prevalence of anxiety ranged between affected by the pandemic. Further, no participants in this study
18 and 92.3% (Alwani et al., 2020; Luo et al., 2020) that were directly affected by the illness; neither participants nor
could be averted by providing better organizational and social participants’ family members contracted the illness or suffered
support, in addition to the implementation of safety measures negative physical health outcomes related to the pandemic, and
at the workplace and quality personal protective equipment participants were not in high-risk groups for contracting the
(PPE) (Labrague and De Los Santos, 2020). Overwhelming disease. In addition, most participants were not directly exposed
workload and lack of sleep may also contribute to the mental to sick patients, in contrast with frontline workers. However, it
burden of frontline workers (Lai et al., 2020) that could be can also be noted that the strategy helped to manage the well-
considered during the assessment of their stress levels. In general, being of the intervention group compared to the control group,
healthy people were found to be less affected by COVID- which belonged to the same demography, age group, education
19 related stress compared to those with anxiety-related or level, and overall environment.
mood disorders in the population-based study conducted in the The United States has been experiencing a surge increase of
US and Canada (Asmundson et al., 2020). A cross-sectional anxiety prescription drugs in recent decades (Ross et al., 2019).
survey based on modified PSS-10 conducted on 406 individuals The COVID-19 pandemic may exaggerate stress and anxiety
comprising professors, students, and health professionals, aimed issues in the US. The rationale of the current intervention
to assess the prevalence and variables related to perceived study aims to provide a proof-of-principle to use anonymous
stress associated with COVID-19 (Pedrozo-Pupo et al., 2020). based interventions as an alternative. Both PSS and COVID-SS
In total, 15% of the participants scored for high perceived scores are markers of stress management. It has been reported
stress associated with COVID-19. However, the prevalence of that group anonymous if performed properly, has the potential
high perceived stress was relatively lower than previous studies to turn negative stress into positive motivations (Murphy
performed during other epidemics, such as equine influenza Lawrence and Hurrell Joseph, 1987). Anonymous is a widely
(Pedrozo-Pupo et al., 2020). However, psychological responses to used therapy method for treatment in alcohol, smoking, and
epidemics and outbreak management relate to several variables, narcotic drug abuse (Moos and Moos, 2006). In this study, the
such as misinformation or information overload and education, intervention emphasizes positive feedback, encouragement, and
although findings regarding education can be inconsistent across mental support to eliminate the fear, stress, and uncertainty due
different countries. For instance, less educated young people were to COVID-19. Improvement in both PSS and COVID-SS scores

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 #9

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

from the intervention group, as well as relatively improved scores tourism, transportation, and retail and manufacturing sectors
compared to the control group, proved the general improvement (Fu and Shen, 2020; Shen et al., 2020). For instance, the
in stress conditions. performance of companies belonging to energy sectors is
It is well-known that increased stress can significantly impair found to be negatively impacted in a study performed on
the productivity, and our mitigation strategy has improved the the corporate performance in the energy industry by the
mental health and resulted in improved research productivity panel data and Difference-in-Difference model (Fu and Shen,
during the pandemic. Health and productivity management 2020). Therefore, this study could be implemented with or
(HPM) was initially introduced back in the 1990s (Goetzel without modifications in every sector to improve the well-
and Ozminkowski, 2000). The main goal of HPM was to train being of individuals and enhance their productivity. More
employees with the capability to handle crises and challenges. specifically, the strategies discussed in this study could be highly
Stress management was also introduced at the beginning of the beneficial when implemented in healthcare and higher education
21st century to promote productivity (Razavi et al., 2012). The institutions.
COVID-19 pandemic is a challenge for both business and the As a vaccine for COVID-19 has not yet been approved,
community. Hence, training researchers to do more with few and due to the resurgence of the infection a future limited
resources will benefit them in both the short-term and long- lock-down may yet take place. Therefore, it is important
term. In the short-term, researchers are engaged in expanding to continue to optimize the current approach if similar
their productivity portfolio by substituting wet-lab research to circumstances recur. Due to current fears for a second
paper/computer-based research. The paper/computer research wave of illness during the flu season, which may further
conducted during this period, including peer-reviewed articles complicate the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, it
and review paper writing and white/technical paper publications, will be beneficial to continue to monitor PSS and COVID-
are also valuable for their career. More importantly, these works, SS regularly. Thus, this finding will provide a potential
especially the process of literature research, may provide hints measure for other research groups to take necessary steps
for future wet-lab experiments. It has been widely accepted by in managing well-being and maintaining productivity in
scientists that stepping away from the wet-lab allows them to reset case the second wave leads to either full or partial lock-
and re-think the research plan to come up with more successful down and/or lab closures. Furthermore, the second wave of
ideas (Harrick et al., 1986; De Bloom et al., 2014). illness will necessitate extra caution in practicing preventive
In the long-term, after experiencing these challenges, health measures. Research groups, as well as groups in
researchers may be more flexible and mature when facing other professions, could use similar empowerment sessions to
negative situations. Negative situations include another global encourage each other to keep healthy diets, meet exercise goals,
pandemic, wars, social conflicts, bias and discriminations, and maintain regular sleep schedules, to the extent that their
negative research results, and any other situations that may bring occupations allow.
stress (Zarei et al., 2014). Finally, the strategy discussed in this study, upon appropriate
modification to tailor the situation, could also be implemented
in other future challenges that we may face, e.g., new emerging
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF or re-emerging epidemics or pandemics, financial crises, natural
THE STUDY disasters, etc. Based on historical perspectives, either locally or
globally, we face financial crises and epidemics every decade,
Our study is unique in that it is designed to maintain well-being as well as natural disasters in multiple countries almost every
and improve the productivity of basic science researchers during year (Archer and Geyer, 1982; Roser, 2019; Financial Times,
the COVID-19 era. Although it is a small case study with only 2020). Therefore, it is important to have a strategy at every
19 participants (a limitation), the study provides preliminary institution, especially at research and educational institutions,
evidence that the strategy has a positive impact on participants’ to effectively mitigate the stress and anxiety caused by these
well-being and productivity. Moreover, the study design using challenges and to improve the well-being and productivity of
both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, provides rigor to individuals.
our analysis and conclusion. This study does not perform cross-
sectional findings for productivity, as comparing data from other
basic science research groups may be unfair and difficult. Our DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
study may be utilized, upon optimization, by a specific group
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be
to manage the well-being of their research group and maintain
made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any
productivity during a challenging situation like COVID-19.
qualified researcher.

IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE ETHICS STATEMENT

PROSPECTS
The studies involving human participants were reviewed
From the corporate perspective, all industries have been and approved by the Institutional Review Board,
affected during COVID-19 pandemic, including the energy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center. The

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 # 10

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

patients/participants provided their written informed consent to FUNDING

participate in this study.
We acknowledge financial support from the National Institute
of Health grant (DA047178) and The Plough Center for
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS Sterile Drug Delivery Solutions, University of Tennessee Health
Science Center.
SaK conceived of the presented idea, obtained and analyzed the
data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SuK obtained
and analyzed the data, and wrote part of the manuscript. AK ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
obtained data, and wrote part of the manuscript. KG obtained
data, and wrote part of the manuscript. KZ Obtained additional We acknowledge all the participants for their survey.
data and contributed significantly for revision of the manuscript. We acknowledge all the participants for their survey.

REFERENCES Financial Times (2020). Financial Crises Occur About Once Every Decade [Online].
Available online at: https://www.ft.com/content/5148cd1e-cf01-11e4-893d-
Alwani, S. S., Majeed, M. M., Hirwani, M. Z., Rauf, S., Saad, S. M., Shah, S. H., et al. 00144feab7de, (accessed October 15, 2020).
(2020). Evaluation of knowledge, practices, attitude and anxiety of pakistans Fu, M., and Shen, H. (2020). COVID-19 and corporate performance in the energy
nurses towards COVID-19 during the Current Outbreak in Pakistan. medRxiv industry. Energy Res. Lett. 1:12967. doi: 10.46557/001c.12967
[Preprint]. 2020.2006.2005.20123703. Georgiou, N., Delfabbro, P., and Balzan, R. (2020). COVID-19-related conspiracy
Anderzén, I., and Arnetz, B. B. (2005). The impact of a prospective survey-based beliefs and their relationship with perceived stress and pre-existing conspiracy
workplace intervention program on employee health, biologic stress markers, beliefs. Pers. Individ. Differ. 166:110201. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110201
and organizational productivity. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 47, 671–682. doi: Goetzel, R. Z., and Ozminkowski, R. J. (2000). Health and productivity
10.1097/01.jom.0000167259.03247.1e management: emerging opportunities for health promotion professionals for
Archer, A. W., and Geyer, R. (1982). Production of cyanide in a sodium nitrite the 21st century. Am. J. Health Promot. 14, 211–214. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-
poisoning case using an acid distillation screening test. J. Forensic. Sci. Soc. 22, 14.4.211
333–334. doi: 10.1016/s0015-7368(82)71506-3 Greenberg, N., Docherty, M., Gnanapragasam, S., and Wessely, S. (2020).
Asensio, C., Aumond, P., Can, A., Gascó, L., Lercher, P., Wunderli, J.-M., et al. Managing mental health challenges faced by healthcare workers during covid-
(2020). A taxonomy proposal for the assessment of the changes in soundscape 19 pandemic. BMJ 368:m1211. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1211
resulting from the COVID-19 lockdown. Int. J. Environ. Res. Pub. Health Guo, Q., Zheng, Y., Shi, J., Wang, J., Li, G., Li, C., et al. (2020). Immediate
17:4205. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17124205 psychological distress in quarantined patients with COVID-19 and its
Asmundson, G. J. G., Paluszek, M. M., Landry, C. A., Rachor, G. S., Mckay, association with peripheral inflammation: A mixed-method study. Brain
D., and Taylor, S. (2020). Do pre-existing anxiety-related and mood disorders Behavior Immunity 88, 17–27. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.038
differentially impact COVID-19 stress responses and coping? J. Anxiety Disord. Harrick, E. J., Vanek, G. R., and Michlitsch, J. F. (1986). Alternate work schedules,
74:102271. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102271 productivity, leave usage, and employee attitudes: a field study. Public Pers.
Bohlken, J., Schömig, F., Lemke, M. R., Pumberger, M., and Riedel-Heller, S. G. Manag. 15, 159–169. doi: 10.1177/009102608601500206
(2020). COVID-19 pandemic: stress experience of healthcare workers - a short Hendriks, T., De Jong, J., and Cramer, H. (2017). The effects of yoga on positive
current review. Psychiatr. Praxis 47, 190–197. doi: 10.1055/a-1159-5551 mental health among healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Carter, P., Anderson, M., and Mossialos, E. (2020). Health system, public health, J. Altern Complement Med. 23, 505–517. doi: 10.1089/acm.2016.0334
and economic implications of managing COVID-19 from a cardiovascular Heylighen, F., and Vidal, C. (2008). Getting things done: the science behind stress-
perspective. Eur. Heart J. 41, 2516–2518. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa342 free productivity. Long Range Planning 41, 585–605. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2008.
Chisholm-Burns, M. A. (2010). A crisis is a really terrible thing to waste. Am. J. 09.004
Pharmaceut. Educ. 74, 19–19. doi: 10.5688/aj740219 Hua, C.-Z., Miao, Z.-P., Zheng, J.-S., Huang, Q., Sun, Q.-F., Lu, H.-P., et al. (2020).
Coronavirus-Resources-Center (2020). COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Epidemiological features and viral shedding in children with SARS-CoV-2
Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) infection. J. Med. Virol. doi: 10.1002/jmv.26180
[Online]. [Epub ahead of print]. Available online at: https://coronavirus.jhu. Jenson, H. B. (2020). How did “flatten the curve” become “flatten the economy?” A
edu/map.html [accessed July 9, 2020). perspective from the United States of America. Asia. J. Psychiatry 51, 102165–
Cutler, D. (2020). How Will COVID-19 Affect the Health Care Economy 102165. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102165
[Online]. Available online at: https://jamanetwork.com/channels/health- Jiménez, Ó, Sánchez-Sánchez, L. C., and García-Montes, J. M. (2020). Psychological
forum/fullarticle/2764547 [accessed Augest 8, 2020). impact of COVID-19 confinement and its relationship with meditation. Int. J.
De Bloom, J., Ritter, S., Kühnel, J., Reinders, J., and Geurts, S. (2014). Vacation from Environ. Res. Public Health 17:6642. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17186642
work: A ‘ticket to creativity’?: The effects of recreational travel on cognitive Kecojevic, A., Basch, C. H., Sullivan, M., and Davi, N. K. (2020). The impact
flexibility and originality. Tour. Manag. 44, 164–171. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman. of the COVID-19 epidemic on mental health of undergraduate students in
2014.03.013 New Jersey, cross-sectional study. PLoS One 15:e0239696. doi: 10.1371/journal.
Donthu, N., and Gustafsson, A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on business and pone.0239696
research. J. Bus. Res. 117, 284–289. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.008 Killgore, W. D. S., Taylor, E. C., Cloonan, S. A., and Dailey, N. S. (2020).
Du, J., Dong, L., Wang, T., Yuan, C., Fu, R., Zhang, L., et al. (2020). Psychological Psychological resilience during the COVID-19 lockdown. Psychiatry Res. 291,
symptoms among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak 113216–113216. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113216
in Wuhan. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry. [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1016/j. Kumar, S. (2020a). Challenges with COVID-19 could bring transformational
genhosppsych.2020.03.011 change, improve human health. Available online at: https://www.
Dubey, S., Biswas, P., Ghosh, R., Chatterjee, S., Dubey, M. J., Chatterjee, S., et al. commercialappeal.com/story/opinion/2020/06/11/enhance-your-health-
(2020). Psychosocial impact of COVID-19. Diab. Metab. Synd. 14, 779–788. during-covid-19/5336309002/ (accessed October 26, 2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2020.05.035 Kumar, S. (2020b). University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center
Epilepsy Society (2020). Empowering Yourself During COVID-19 [Online]. making strides in treating COVID-19 | Opinion. Available online at:
Available online at: http://bcepilepsy.com/blog/empowering-yourself-during- https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/opinion/2020/04/13/progress-
covid19 (accessed October 15, 2020). made-finding-covid-19-vaccine/2985371001/ (accessed October 26, 2020).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 # 11

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

Labrague, L. J., and De Los Santos, J. (2020). COVID-19 anxiety among frontline Power, K. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the care burden of
nurses: predictive role of organisational support, personal resilience and social women and families. Sustainability 16, 67–73. doi: 10.1080/15487733.2020.
support. J. Nurs. Manag. 28, 1653–1661. doi: 10.1101/2020.07.16.20141069 1776561
Lai, J., Ma, S., Wang, Y., Cai, Z., Hu, J., Wei, N., et al. (2020). Factors associated with Qiu, J., Shen, B., Zhao, M., Wang, Z., Xie, B., and Xu, Y. (2020). A nationwide
mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19
disease 2019. JAMA Netw. Open 3:e203976. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen. epidemic: implications and policy recommendations. Gen Psychiatr 33:e100213.
2020.3976 doi: 10.1136/gpsych-2020-100213
Lee, S. A. (2020). Coronavirus Anxiety Scale: a brief mental health screener for Razavi, R., Emamgholizadeh, S., and Emami, M. (2012). A survey of the
COVID-19 related anxiety. Death Stud. 44, 393–401. doi: 10.1080/07481187. relationship between stress management and workforce productivity of one of
2020.1748481 iran’s industrial parks. Elixir Human Res. Mgmt. 48, 9371–9378.
Limcaoco, R. S. G., Mateos, E. M., Fernandez, J. M., and Roncero, C. Renu, K., Prasanna, P. L., and Valsala Gopalakrishnan, A. (2020). Coronaviruses
(2020). Anxiety, worry and perceived stress in the world due to the pathogenesis, comorbidities and multi-organ damage - A review. Life Sci.
COVID-19 pandemic, March 2020. Preliminary results. medRxiv [Preprint]. 255:117839. doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2020.117839
2020.2004.2003.20043992. Rogers, J. P., Chesney, E., Oliver, D., Pollak, T. A., Mcguire, P., Fusar-Poli, P., et al.
Liu, N., Zhang, F., Wei, C., Jia, Y., Shang, Z., Sun, L., et al. (2020). Prevalence (2020). Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe
and predictors of PTSS during COVID-19 outbreak in China hardest-hit areas: coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison
gender differences matter. Psychiatry Res. 287:112921. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres. to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Psychiatry 7, 611–627. doi: 10.1016/s2215-
2020.112921 0366(20)30203-0
Luo, M., Guo, L., Yu, M., Jiang, W., and Wang, H. (2020). The psychological Roser, H. R. A. M. (2019). Natural Disasters [Online]. Available online at: https:
and mental impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on medical staff //ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters (accessed October 15, 2020).
and general public - A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. Ross, E. L., Vijan, S., Miller, E. M., Valenstein, M., and Zivin, K. (2019).
291:113190. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113190 The cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy versus second-
Ma, Y., Rosenheck, R., and He, H. (2020). Psychological stress among health generation antidepressants for initial treatment of major depressive disorder
care professionals during the 2019 novel coronavirus disease Outbreak: Cases in the United States. Ann. Int. Med. 171, 785–795. doi: 10.7326/m18-
from online consulting customers. Intensive Crit. Care Nurs. 20:102905. doi: 1480
10.1016/j.iccn.2020.102905 Salari, N., Hosseinian-Far, A., Jalali, R., Vaisi-Raygani, A., Rasoulpoor, S.,
Manch, S. E. (2020). Focusing on Resilience. Available online at: https: Mohammadi, M., et al. (2020). Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression
//www.winston.com/en/thought-leadership/focusing-on-resilience.html among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic
(accessed October 26, 2020). review and meta-analysis. Global Health 16:57. doi: 10.1186/s12992-020-
Mclaren, H. J., Wong, K. R., Nguyen, K. N., and Mahamadachchi, K. N. D. (2020). 00589-w
Covid-19 and Women’s triple burden: vignettes from Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Satiani, B., Zigrang, T. A., and Bailey-Wheaton, J. L. (2020). COVID-19 financial
Vietnam and Australia. Soc. Sci. 9:87. doi: 10.3390/socsci9050087 resources for physicians. J. Vascul. Surgery 72, 1161–1165. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.
Meira, T. M., Paiva, S. M., Antelo, O. M., Guimarães, L. K., Bastos, S. Q., and 2020.04.482
Tanaka, O. M. (2020). Perceived stress and quality of life among graduate dental Schlesselman, L. S., Cain, J., and Divall, M. (2020). Improving and restoring the
faculty. J. Dental Educ. 84, 1099–1107. doi: 10.1002/jdd.12241 well-being and resilience of pharmacy students during a pandemic. Am. J.
Ming, W., Zhou, Z., Ai, H., Bi, H., and Zhong, Y. (2020). COVID-19 and air Pharm Educ. 84:aje8144. doi: 10.5688/ajpe8144
quality: evidence from China. Emerg. Markets Finan. Trade 56, 2422–2442. Seyedin, H., Samadipour, E., and Salmani, I. (2019). Intervention strategies for
doi: 10.1080/1540496x.2020.1790353 improvement of disasters risk perception: family-centered approach. J. Educ.
Moos, R. H., and Moos, B. S. (2006). Participation in treatment and Alcoholics Health Promot 8:63.
Anonymous: A 16-year follow-up of initially untreated individuals. J. Clin. Shammi, M., Bodrud-Doza, M., Towfiqul Islam, A. R. M., and Rahman, M. M.
Psychol. 62, 735–750. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20259 (2020). COVID-19 pandemic, socioeconomic crisis and human stress in
Murphy Lawrence, R., and Hurrell Joseph, J. (1987). Stress management in the resource-limited settings: A case from Bangladesh. Heliyon 6:e04063. doi: 10.
process of occupational stress reduction. J. Manag. Psychol. 2, 18–23. doi: 1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04063
10.1108/eb043387 Shen, H., Fu, M., Pan, H., Yu, Z., and Chen, Y. (2020). The impact of the COVID-
New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services (2020). Perceived Stress 19 pandemic on firm performance. Emerg. Markets Fin. Trade 56, 2213–2230.
Scale. Concord, NH: New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services. doi: 10.1080/1540496x.2020.1785863
Ornell, F., Schuch, J. B., Sordi, A. O., and Kessler, F. H. P. (2020). “Pandemic fear” Shultz, J. M., Cooper, J. L., Baingana, F., Oquendo, M. A., Espinel, Z., Althouse,
and COVID-19: mental health burden and strategies. Braz. J. Psychiatry 42, B. M., et al. (2016). The role of fear-related behaviors in the 2013-2016 west
232–235. doi: 10.1590/1516-4446-2020-0008 africa ebola virus disease outbreak. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 18:104. doi: 10.1007/
Ozamiz-Etxebarria, N., Dosil-Santamaria, M., Picaza-Gorrochategui, M., and s11920-016-0741-y
Idoiaga-Mondragon, N. (2020). Stress, anxiety, and depression levels in the Spuntarelli, V., Luciani, M., Bentivegna, E., Marini, V., Falangone, F., Conforti,
initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in a population sample in the G., et al. (2020). COVID-19: is it just a lung disease? A case-based review. SN
northern Spain. Cad Saude Pub. 36:e00054020. doi: 10.1590/0102-311x0005 Compr. Clin. Med. 20, 1–6. doi: 10.1007/s42399-020-00418-6
4020 Stanton, R., To, Q. G., Khalesi, S., Williams, S. L., Alley, S. J., Thwaite, T. L.,
Pappa, S., Ntella, V., Giannakas, T., Giannakoulis, V. G., Papoutsi, E., and et al. (2020). Depression, Anxiety and Stress during COVID-19: associations
Katsaounou, P. (2020). Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among with changes in physical activity, sleep, tobacco and alcohol use in australian
healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and adults. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:7848. doi: 10.3390/ijerph1711
meta-analysis. Brain Behav. Immun. 88, 901–907. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2020. 4065
05.026 Tangen, K. O., Lindmo, T., Sobrinho-Simões, M., and Johannessen, J. V. (1981).
Patel, A., Jernigan, D. B., and nCoV CDC Response Team, (2020). Initial Cellular DNA content in normal human thyroid: a flow cytometric study based
Public Health Response and Interim Clinical Guidance for the 2019 Novel on frozen biopsy material. Diagn Histopathol. 4, 343–348.
Coronavirus Outbreak - United States, December 31, 2019-February 4, 2020. Taylor, M. R., Agho, K. E., Stevens, G. J., and Raphael, B. (2008). Factors influencing
MMWR. Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 69, 140–146. doi: 10.15585/mmwr. psychological distress during a disease epidemic: data from Australia’s first
mm6905e1 outbreak of equine influenza. BMC Public Health 8:347. doi: 10.1186/1471-
Pedrozo-Pupo, J. C., Pedrozo-Cortés, M. J., and Campo-Arias, A. (2020). Perceived 2458-8-347
stress associated with COVID-19 epidemic in Colombia: an online survey. Cad Taylor and Francis (2020). Special Issue: research on pandemics. Emerging Mark.
Saude Pub. 36:e00090520. doi: 10.1590/0102-311x00090520 Finance Trade 20:56.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712

fpsyg-11-574712 November 3, 2020 Time: 18:7 # 12

Kumar et al. Well-Being of Researchers During COVID-19

Titov, N., Staples, L., Kayrouz, R., Cross, S., Karin, E., Ryan, K., et al. (2020). Rapid Yin, Q., Sun, Z., Liu, T., Ni, X., Deng, X., Jia, Y., et al. (2020). Posttraumatic stress
report: Early demand, profiles and concerns of mental health users during the symptoms of health care workers during the corona virus disease 2019. Clin.
coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Int. Intervent. 21:100327. doi: 10.1016/j. Psychol. Psychother. 27, 384–395. doi: 10.1002/cpp.2477
invent.2020.100327 Zarei, M. H., Razavi, H. R., and Emamgholizadeh, S. (2014). Is stress management
UTHSC (2020). UTHSC COVID-19 Update: Shelter in Place [Online]. Available related to workforce productivity? Iranian J. Manag. Stud. 7, 1–9.
online at: https://www.uthsc.edu/coronavirus/campus-updates/update-03-23- Zarghami, A., Farjam, M., Fakhraei, B., Hashemzadeh, K., and Yazdanpanah, M. H.
20-b.php (accessed March 23, 2020). (2020). A report of the telepsychiatric evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 patients.
Vidya, C. T., and Prabheesh, K. P. (2020). Implications of COVID-19 pandemic Telemed. Health 20:788. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2020.0125
on the global trade networks. Emerg. Mark. Finance Trade 56, 2408–2421.
doi: 10.1080/1540496x.2020.1785426 Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
World Health Organization (2004). Promoting Mental Health [Online]. Available absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
online at: https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/promoting_mhh. potential conflict of interest.
pdf (accessed October 15, 2020).
Wu, W., Zhang, Y., Wang, P., Zhang, L., Wang, G., Lei, G., et al. (2020). Copyright © 2020 Kumar, Kodidela, Kumar, Gerth and Zhi. This is an open-access
Psychological stress of medical staffs during outbreak of COVID-19 and article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
adjustment strategy. J. Med. Virol. 21:25914. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25914 (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided
Xiong, J., Lipsitz, O., Nasri, F., Lui, L. M. W., Gill, H., Phan, L., et al. (2020). the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general population: publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No
a systematic review. J. Affect. Disord. 277, 55–64. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.001 use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 November 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 574712