ArticleJournal of family & community medicine
Cognitive function and work resilience of healthcare professionals: A comparative cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of family & community medicine. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare professionals (HCPs) face a variety of work-related stressors that have impact on their mental health and cognitive performance. Work resilience is a psychological resource that helps workers cope with stress and prevents unfavorable psychological impact. The aim of this study was to assess the associations between working as HCPs and cognitive function as well as work resilience. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a comparative cross-sectional study conducted among HCPs at Suez Canal University Hospital in Ismailia Governorate, Egypt, during April 2023 to August 2023. Two hundred and thirty-five HCPs and 107 administrative employees (Admins) were invited to participate in this study. A self-administered questionnaire was used to obtain sociodemographic and other relavent data. Cognitive function was assessed with the Mini-Mental State Examination test; work resilience was assessed with the Brief Resilience Scale; and psychological distress was measured with the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - 21-items (DASS-21) scale. Statistical significance was determined by Mann Whitney U-test for continuous variables, and Chi-square test or Fisher's exact, as appropriate, for categorical variables. Multiple logistic regression models were employed to determine associations between the main outcomes (cognitive impairment and low resilience) and the main covariate (working as HCPs vs. Admins), adjusting for all potential confounders.
resultsHCPs showed a significantly greater cognitive impairment, less resilience, and DASS-21 than the Admins. The odds of impaired cognitive function in HCPs were significantly higher than the Admins (odds ratio [OR]: 4.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27-15.67,
conclusionHCPs had significantly impaired cognitive function and low work resilience. Workplace policies and interventions to control depression, stress, and anxiety are required as it is the encouragement of physical activity. Programs that combine positive coping skills training (e.g., relaxation training, positive thinking, and problem solving) with resilience-building interventions (e.g., taking a proactive approach to solving problems, being flexible and adaptive) should be developed, with special attention to HCPs who have a higher sense of self-efficacy.
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.