ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2022
Subjective well-being among psychotherapists during the coronavirus disease pandemic: A cross-cultural survey from 12 european countries.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of HPV test results and emotional responses on psychosocial burden among Taiwanese women: a cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2025Observational
- The Role of Subjective Well-Being in Therapist Responsiveness and Session Evaluation: A 10-Wave Longitudinal Study.Clinical psychology & psychotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study is to examine the amount of the total variance of the subjective well-being (SWB) of psychotherapists from 12 European countries explained by between-country vs. between-person differences regarding its cognitive (life satisfaction) and affective components (positive affect [PA] and negative affect [NA]). Second, we explored a link between the SWB and their personal (self-efficacy) and social resources (social support) after controlling for sociodemographics, work characteristics, and COVID-19-related distress.
methodsIn total, 2915 psychotherapists from 12 countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Finland, Great Britain, Serbia, Spain, Norway, Poland, Romania, Sweden, and Switzerland) participated in this study. The participants completed the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the International Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Short Form (I-PANAS-SF), the General Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support.
resultsCognitive well-being (CWB; satisfaction with life) was a more country-dependent component of SWB than affective well-being (AWB). Consequently, at the individual level, significant correlates were found only for AWB but not for CWB. Higher AWB was linked to being female, older age, higher weekly workload, and lower COVID-19-related distress. Self-efficacy and social support explained AWB only, including their main effects and the moderating effect of self-efficacy.
conclusionsThe results highlight more individual characteristics of AWB compared to CWB, with a more critical role of low self-efficacy for the link between social support and PA rather than NA. This finding suggests the need for greater self-care among psychotherapists regarding their AWB and the more complex conditions underlying their CWB.
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.