Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35221693›Full record

ArticleHealth services insights2022

Individual-Level Factors are Significantly More Predictive of Employee Innovativeness Than Job-Specific or Organization-Level Factors: Results From a Quantitative Study of Health Professionals.

Sarah J Hewko

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services insights, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah J HewkoDepartment of Applied Human Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8804-4686
University of Prince Edward Island · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual innovativeness is particularly indispensable among health professionals. The healthcare environment is complex and its knowledge workers must continually adapt to change and be comfortable with ambiguity. The objective of this study was to determine the relative importance of individual, job-specific, and organizational factors on innovative output of health professionals. Employed Canadian Registered Dietitians (n = 237) completed an online survey incorporating relevant validated tools, including the 10-item Big Five Inventory and the Alberta Context Tool. Factors were classified by level and introduced in blocks to a multivariate linear regression model, with the outcome of self-reported innovative output. Factors included in the model explained 44% of variation in self-reported innovative output. Although all blocks contributed significantly to the model, minimal variation was explained by factors at the job-specific (4%) and organizational levels (4%). Factors at the individual level most predictive of innovative output were role innovation, the personality trait of conscientiousness and voluntary membership in a professional association. To encourage employee innovativeness, health administrators, and managers of health professionals should consider how best to incorporate screens for individual-level indicators of innovative output (eg, personality tests) in their institutional hiring and selection processes.

Indexed as

Alberta Context ToolCanadachange managementdietitianHealth care professionalhealth services administrationinnovativenesslinear regressionpersonality assessmentspersonnel selection

Identifiers

PMID35221693
PMCPMC8874207
OpenAlexW4214560824

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.