| Popis: |
Background: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has spurred scientific production in diverse fieldsof knowledge, including mental health. Yet, the quality of current research may bechallenged by the urgent need to provide immediate results to understand and alleviatethe consequences of the pandemic. This systematic review aims to examine compliancewith basic methodological quality criteria and open science practices on the mental healtheffects of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Scopus databases onthe 13th of May. Empirical studies, published in peer-reviewed journals in English,between February and May 2020, were included. The dependent variable(s) required tobe quantitative and related to mental health. Exclusion criteria included clinicalpharmacological trials, and studies using psychophysiological or biological recordings.The study protocol was previously pre-registered in https://osf.io/bk3gw/.Findings: Twenty-eight studies were identified. More than 75% met the requirementsrelated to reporting key methodological and statistical information. However, 89.3% usedconvenience samples and 92.86% lacked of a priori power analysis. There was lowcompliance with open science recommendations, such as pre-registration of studies (0%)and availability of databases (3.57%), which raise concerns about the validity,generalisability, and reproducibility of the findings.Interpretation: While the importance of offering rapid evidence-based responses tomitigate mental health problems stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic is undeniable,it should not be done at the expense of sacrificing scientific rigor. The results of this studymay stimulate researchers and funding agencies to try to orchestrate efforts and resourcesand follow standard codes of good science. |
