Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32843890›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2020

Comparing perceived psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in two university hospitals in Germany with other German professionals - feasibility of scale conversion between two versions of the German Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ).

Anke Wagner, Matthias Nübling, Antje Hammer, Tanja Manser, Monika A Rieger, WorkSafeMed Consortium

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Predictors of Quality of Work Life in Health Care Workers at Adult Critical Care Units: A Cross-sectional Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. COPSOQ III in Germany: validation of a standard instrument to measure psychosocial factors at work.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Anke WagnerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5053-1753
Matthias NüblingFreiburg Research Centre for Occupational Sciences (FFAW GmbH), Bertoldstr. 63, 79098 Freiburg, Germany.
Antje HammerInstitute of Patient Safety, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Tanja ManserFHNW School of Applied Psychology, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, Riggenbachstrasse 16, 4600 Olten, Switzerland.
Monika A RiegerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tübingen, Wilhelmstraße 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.
WorkSafeMed Consortium
FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts · CHUniversity of Tübingen · DEUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEResearch Centre for Applied System Safety and Industrial Medicine · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2015, the WorkSafeMed study assessed, amongst others, perceived psychosocial working conditions in nurses (

methodsWe applied a multistep approach for conversion. First, we compared 17 COPSOQ scales used in the WorkSafeMed study with the corresponding scales from the G-COPSOQ III according to content and then decided if a conversion was appropriate. If possible, we converted WorkSafeMed scales - the converted scales comprised the same content and number of items as in G-COPSOQ III. An explorative statistical analysis for each original and converted WorkSafeMed scale followed detecting possible statistical and relevant differences between the scales. We then compared converted WorkSafeMed scales with reference data from the German COPSOQ database.

resultsBased on the comparison undertaken according to content, a conversion was possible for 16 scales. Using the data from the WorkSafeMed study, the statistical analysis showed only differences between original and converted COPSOQ scales

conclusionsThe conversion of WorkSafeMed scales was appropriate, allowed a comparison with three reference values in the German COPSOQ database and revealed some implications for improving psychosocial working conditions of nurses and physicians in university hospitals in Germany.

Indexed as

Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaireCOPSOQ databaseExplorative statistical analysisHospitalsNursesPhysiciansPsychosocial working conditionsReference data

Identifiers

PMID32843890
PMCPMC7439506
OpenAlexW3080463419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.