ArticlePloS one2021
Assessing civility at an academic health science center: Implications for employee satisfaction and well-being.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Went Right? A Mixed-Methods Study of Positive Feedback Data in a Hospital-Wide Mortality Review Survey.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- Advancing Workplace Civility: a systematic review and meta-analysis of definitions, measurements, and associated factors.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- In their own words: Experiences of emergency health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incivilities are pervasive among workers in healthcare institutions. Previously identified effects include deterioration of employee physical and mental health, absenteeism, burnout, and turnover, as well as reduced patient safety and quality of care. This study documented factors related to organizational civility at an academic health sciences center (AHSC) as the basis for future intervention work. We used a cross-sectional research design to conduct an online survey at four of five campuses of an AHSC. Using the Organizational Civility Scale (OCS), we assessed differences across gender, race (White and non-White) and job type (faculty or staff) in the eleven subscales (frequency of incivility, perceptions of organizational climate, existence of civility resources, importance of civility resources, feelings about current employment, employee satisfaction, sources of stress, coping strategies, overall levels of stress/coping ability, and overall civility rating). Significant gender differences were found in six of the eleven subscales: perception of organizational climate (p < .001), existence of civility resources (p = .001), importance of civility resources (p < .001), frequency of incivilities (p < .001), employee satisfaction (p = .002), and overall civility rating (p = .007). Significant differences between respondents by self-identified race were found only in one subscale: existence of civility resources (p = .048). Significant differences were found between faculty and staff in four subscales: perception of organizational climate (p = .001), importance of civility resources (p = .02), employee satisfaction (p = .01), and overall levels of stress (p = .03). Results suggest that gender and employment type differences exist in the perception of organizational climate at the academic health center, while significant racial differences only occurred in reference to reported existence of civility resources. Attention to these differences should be incorporated into the development of programs to address the problem.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.