Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35922108›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Working from home during COVID-19 in a Danish hospital research setting: experiences of researchers and healthcare providers, explored by Group Concept Mapping.

Ina Olmer Specht, Karoline Winckler, Robin Christensen, Claus Bomhoff, Rie Raffing, Eva Ejlersen Wæhrens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Ina Olmer SpechtThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark ina.olmer.specht@regionh.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-3114-4715
Karoline WincklerThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Robin ChristensenThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Claus BomhoffThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rie RaffingThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eva Ejlersen WæhrensThe Parker Institute, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has changed the working environment, how we think of it and how it stands to develop into the future. Knowledge about how people have continued to work on-site and adjusted to working from home during the COVID-19 lockdown will be vital for planning work arrangements in the post-pandemic period. Our primary objective was to investigate experiences of working from home or having colleagues working from home during a late stage of the COVID-19 lockdown among researchers and healthcare providers in a hospital research setting. Second, we aimed to investigate researchers' productivity through changes in various proxy measures during lockdown as compared with pre-lockdown.

designMixed-method participatory Group Concept Mapping (GCM). SETTING AND

participantsGCM, based on a mixed-method participatory approach, was applied involving researchers' and healthcare providers' online sorting and rating experiences working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. At a face-to-face meeting, participants achieved consensus on the number and labelling of domains-the basis for developing a conceptual model.

resultsThrough the GCM approach, 47 participants generated 125 unique statements of experiences related to working from home, which were organised into seven clusters. Using these clusters, we developed a conceptual model that illustrated the pros and cons of working from home.

conclusionThe future work setting, the role of the office and the overall work environment need to respond to workers' increased wish for flexible work arrangements and co-decision.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelResearch PersonnelCommunicable Disease ControlDenmarkHospitalsHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19human resource managementorganisational development

Identifiers

PMID35922108
PMCPMC9352564

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.