ArticleBMJ open2024
Emergency department workforces' experiences and perceptions of well-being from an international perspective: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Psychological wellbeing of healthcare professionals in regional, rural and remote emergency departments: an integrative review.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Supporting emergency departments workers well-being: a systematic review of the literature on interventions.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Where trauma and trauma-informed care collide: ethical considerations for emergency medicine.CJEM · 2025Article
- Strengthening team cohesion in the emergency department through a color-coded well-being check-in: are you 'ready to roll?'Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Examination of Job Satisfaction in Emergency Medicine From the Perspective of Physicians Also Working in Prehospital and Retrieval Medicine.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify and present the available evidence regarding workforce well-being in the emergency department.
designScoping review.
settingThe emergency department (ED). DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched with no publication time parameters. The reference lists of articles selected for full-text review were also screened for additional papers. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: All peer-reviewed, empirical papers were included if: (1) participants included staff-based full-time in the ED, (2) ED workforce well-being was a key component of the research, (3) English language was available and (4) the main focus was not burnout or other mental illness-related variables.
resultsThe search identified 6109 papers and 34 papers were included in the review. Most papers used a quantitative or mixed methods survey design, with very limited evidence using in-depth qualitative methods to explore ED workforce well-being. Interventions accounted for 41% of reviewed studies. Findings highlighted pressing issues with ED workforce well-being, contributed to by a range of interpersonal, organisational and individual challenges (eg, high workloads, lack of support). However, the limited evidence base, tenuous conceptualisations and links to well-being in existing literature mean that the findings were neither consistent nor conclusive.
conclusionsThis scoping review highlights the need for more high-quality research to be conducted, particularly using qualitative methods and the development of a working definition of ED workforce well-being.
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.