ArticleIndustrial health2021
Developing a questionnaire on the quality of working life for female medical and healthcare professionals.
Article in Industrial health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop a questionnaire on the quality of working life among female medical and healthcare professionals and examine its validity and reliability. The questionnaire was developed from an item pool drawing on the literature. The four trait scales included 40 items, covering female-specific stress in continuing a career, stress of lifestyle in maintaining personal values, job satisfaction and social support network. The questionnaire's validity and reliability were assessed using data from 1,784 female doctors, dentists, and nurses. Validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis on each trait for construct validity, and multitrait scaling analysis for convergent and discriminant validity. Reliability was tested using Cronbach's alpha for trait subscales and scales. Exploratory factor analysis on each trait was convergent. One trait derived three subscales, and another two. The remaining two traits were convergent for one factor. Multitrait scaling analysis showed that all scales and subscales were independent. The questionnaire was therefore internally consistent and had construct validity. Cronbach's alpha was 0.85 for the total and between 0.72 and 0.83 for the subscales. These results validate the four-trait combination questionnaire and suggest that it would be suitable for use in future research, perhaps in combination with other existing scales.
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.