Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33310807›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Does digital health technology improve physicians' job satisfaction and work-life balance? A cross-sectional national survey and regression analysis using an instrumental variable.

Arezou Zaresani, Anthony Scott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Bibliometric Analysis of Health Technology Research: 1990~2020.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. General Practice Statistics in Australia: Pushing a Round Peg into a Square Hole.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Arezou ZaresaniUniversity of Manitoba, Institute for Labor Economics (IZA) and Tax and Transfer Policy Institute (TTPI) at The Australian National University, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Arezou.Zaresani@umanitoba.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-6271-9374
Anthony ScottMelbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine the association between physicians' use of digital health technology and their job satisfaction and work-life balance.

designA cross-sectional nationally representative survey of physicians and probit regression models were used to examine the association between using digital health technology and the probability of reporting high job satisfaction and a good work-life balance. Models included a rich set of covariates, including physicians' personality traits, and instrumental variable analysis was used to control for bias from unobservable confounders and reverse causality.

settingClinical practice settings in Australia, including physicians working in primary care, hospitals, outpatient settings, and physicians working in the public and private sectors.

participantsRespondents to wave 11 (2018-2019) of the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) longitudinal survey of doctors. The analysis sample included a broadly nationally representative sample of 7043 physicians, including general practitioners, specialists and physicians in training. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of respondents who used any digital health technology; proportion answered 'moderately satisfied' or 'very satisfied' to the statement on job satisfaction: 'Taking everything into account, how do you feel about your work'; proportion agreeing or strongly agreeing to the statement on work-life balance: 'The balance between my personal and professional commitments is about right.'

resultsPhysicians with positive beliefs about the effectiveness of using digital health technology were 3.8 percentage points (95% CI 2.7 to 5.0) more likely to use digital health technology compared with those who did not. Physicians with colleagues who already used digital health technology were also 4.1 percentage points (95% CI 2.6 to 5.6) more likely to use digital health technology. The availability of IT support and lack of privacy concerns increased the probability of using digital health technology by 1.6 percentage points (95% CI 1.0 to 2.3) and 0.5 percentage points (95% CI 0.1 to 1.0). Physicians who used digital health technology were 14.2 percentage points (95% CI -1.3 to 29.7) and 20.3 percentage points (95% CI 2.4 to 38.1) more likely to report respectively higher job satisfaction and good work-life balance, compared with the physicians who did not use it.

conclusionsFindings suggested digital health technology served more as a work resource than work demand for physicians who used it.

Indexed as

Biomedical TechnologyJob SatisfactionWork-Life BalanceAdultAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleRegression AnalysisSurveys and Questionnaireshealth economicshealth policyinformation managementtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33310807
PMCPMC7735090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.