Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38021855›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Healthcare Practitioners' Quality of Life in Rural and Urban Areas of Saudi Arabia.

Nada M Allhaiby, Asia M Kalantan, Mariam M Tunkar, Maha A Abuzenada, Basim S Alsaywid

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nada M AllhaibyMedicine and Surgery, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, SAU.
Asia M KalantanMedicine and Surgery, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, SAU.
Mariam M TunkarMedicine and Surgery, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS), Jeddah, SAU.
Maha A AbuzenadaResearch and Development, Saudi Commission for Health Specialties, Jeddah, SAU.
Basim S AlsaywidEducation and Research Skills, Saudi National Institute of Health, Riyadh, SAU.
King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe quality of care delivered by healthcare practitioners (HCPs) is crucial in promoting optimal health and quality of life (QOL) for a population. To achieve this, understanding the factors that affect the quality of life of healthcare practitioners is essential for governments to develop sustainable healthcare systems. Developed countries have a major role to play in this aspect, as the misallocation of healthcare providers to the wrong geographic regions can significantly impact their performance.  Aim: This study aims to evaluate the factors associated with healthcare practitioners' (HCP) quality of life (QOL) and provide workforce planning with knowledge of the level of QOL among HCPs and its factors in Saudi Arabia in 2021.

methodsThis is an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study conducted in both rural and urban areas of Saudi Arabia. The study population includes all healthcare practitioners practicing in Saudi Arabia. A probability-stratified random sampling technique was used to recruit healthcare practitioners into the study, with a requirement of at least 380 practitioners to achieve 95% confidence and a 5% margin of error. To assess the quality of life of healthcare practitioners in Saudi Arabia, the study used a national online self-administered questionnaire that was designed by the research team. The data collection process took place from June 2021 to October 2021, and responses were obtained randomly. For analysis, the study used descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentages, mean or median, and standard deviation or interquartile range. The statistical significance was set at p<0.05, and independent sample T-tests and Chi-square tests were calculated to determine any significant differences between groups.

resultsA total of 439 participants completed the questionnaire and were included in the final analysis. The participants had a mean age of 38.8 years (SD = 10.173), with 232 (52.8%) male and 207 (47.2%) female. Regarding marital status, 28% were single, 68.6% were married, and 3.4% were divorced or widowed. The prevalence of chronic diseases in the cohort was 9.1%, with hypertension being the most commonly reported. Of the participants, 362 (82.5%) were living in a society considered urban, while 77 (17.5%) were living in rural areas. Urban healthcare practitioners expressed higher levels of satisfaction with safety and security, internet availability and speed, and city infrastructure compared to their rural counterparts. However, rural practitioners reported greater satisfaction with the cost of living, and transportation quality was a point of concern for both groups.

conclusionThe study shows that people living in urban and rural areas are all satisfied with their living conditions based on many factors mentioned in the results section. This indicates that there is no significant difference. The most important factor that affects satisfaction with living is health status. The rate of satisfaction is very high for all factors, including security and safety, environmental health, city infrastructure, cost of living, internet availability, and sports activity-all of which are related to the city itself. For factors related to the individual, such as emotional support from family and friends, personal relationships, overall health, and body appearance, the rate of satisfaction is also high.

Indexed as

healthcare practitionersquality of liferuralsaudi arabiaurban

Identifiers

PMID38021855
PMCPMC10630724
OpenAlexW4387458763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.