ArticleBMC public health2024
Development, validation, and cut-off points for a questionnaire to measure sources of stress in veterinary medicine (SOS-VetMed).
Article in BMC public health, 2024. 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.
- Ecologies of care: qualitative insights from a psychosocial study on veterinarians' experiences in Northeastern Italy.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Validation of the burnout assessment tool-core symptoms in Spanish veterinarians, sex invariance, and cutoff points.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
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
backgroundOccupational stress is a serious problem in veterinary medicine; however, validated instruments to measure this problem are lacking. The aim of the current study was to address this literature gap by designing and validating a questionnaire and establishing the cut-off points for identifying veterinarians with high and low levels of stress.
methodsThe study involved two sub-studies with two Spanish samples. The first study (N = 30 veterinarians; 66.7% women; 63.33% from small animal clinics) investigated the factors related to the work environment that caused the most stress; the results were analyzed using thematic content analysis. The second study (N = 1082; 70.8% women; 71.4% from small animal clinics) involved designing and validating a questionnaire to measure sources of stress in veterinary medicine, as well as establishing the cut-off points for interpreting the results using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis.
resultsThe first study showed the main sources of stress and allowed items to be defined for the questionnaire. The second study validated the Sources of Stress in Veterinarian Medicine (SOS-VetMed) questionnaire and confirmed five sources of stress with adequate reliability and validity indices: "work overload," "work-family conflict," "emotional burden of work," "organizational factors," and "emergency problems." Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses verified a structure of five factors (Cronbach's alpha values ranging between 0.92 and 0.69). The five subscales of the SOS-VetMed questionnaire were positively correlated with two indicators of distress: "psychological complaints" and "psychosomatic complaints." The cut-off points indicated that 45.83% and 19.95% of the veterinarians surveyed had high and low levels of stress, respectively.
conclusionsThe results confirmed that the SOS-VetMed questionnaire could be used to determine the stress levels of veterinarians and to design intervention programs to improve their workplace health.
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.