ArticlePloS one2023
Working conditions of the clinical health workforce in the public health facilities in Bangladesh.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Burnout among healthcare professionals in Bangladesh: a narrative review.Discover mental health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of a well-equipped and supported healthcare workforce, and Bangladesh still faces challenges in providing adequate and well-equipped healthcare services. Therefore, the study aims to assess the level of working conditions of the clinical health workers in Bangladesh and their relative importance in delivering quality healthcare services.
methodsThe study followed a cross-sectional study design and collected primary data adopting a quantitative method. A total of 319 clinical workforces from four districts and eight sub-districts were randomly selected using a multi-stage sampling technique. A 26-component questionnaire used to assess various components of working conditions. Descriptive statistics, and bivariate analysis were used to analyze the data.
resultsThe study found that the working conditions of clinical health workers in primary and secondary healthcare facilities in Bangladesh were quite poor (3.40), with almost two-thirds of respondents showing negative views in 23 out of 26 indicators. The results also showed that working conditions were significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher in primary compared to secondary level facilities. Moreover, men, younger workforce, and workforce with shorter length of service were more likely to report poor working conditions than their counterparts. Lastly, receiving monthly salary in due time was top-ranked (99.15) in terms of importance for delivering quality healthcare, followed by availability of medicines (98.04), and medical and surgical requisites (97.57), and adequate mentoring and support to perform duties (97.50).
conclusionThe study highlights the poor working conditions of clinical health workers in public health facilities in Bangladesh. It recommends that policymakers should prioritize improving working conditions by addressing the factors that are crucial for delivering quality healthcare. Improving working conditions will have a positive impact on the retention and motivation of workers, which will ultimately lead to better health outcomes for the population.
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.