ArticleJAMA network open2025
Implementation of an Organization-Based Couples Health Promotion Program to Improve Physician Well-Being.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. 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.
- Impact of a Medical Career on Reproductive Planning and Knowledge of Assisted Reproductive Technology Among Brazilian Women.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2026Article
- Sex-Specific Risks of Occupational Distress in Physicians Compared With the General Population.JAMA network open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Physicians work long, often unpredictable hours and experience multiple work-related stressors, which may adversely affect their personal relationships. Objective: To assess the associations of a couples' workshop for physicians and their partners with burnout, self-valuation, and impact of work on personal relationships (IWPR). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, participants were grouped into an immediate intervention group and a delayed intervention control group, which were later compared. The participants in the intervention group gathered at a resort near Stanford University in October 2022, whereas the participants in the control group were invited to participate in a May 2023 workshop. Invited participants included Stanford Medicine physicians and their partners. Eligible physicians worked in a department or division considered frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic or had unfavorable IWPR scores on an institution-wide survey. The data were analyzed from June 14, 2024, to October 1, 2024. Intervention: The intervention group participated in a 2-day workshop for couples and were offered 3 evening sessions. All sessions emphasized positive psychology principles and incorporated didactic, reflection, and unstructured content focused on strengthening relationships. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was IWPR score, measured at baseline (immediately preceding the workshop for the intervention group and at registration for the control group) and 6 months later. IWPR was measured with a survey asking 4 questions about how work had affected personal relationships during the past year, and the responses included not at all true, somewhat true, moderately true, very true, and completely true (with scores assigned as 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Other outcome measures included burnout and self-valuation (with a lower score being favorable for burnout and a higher score being favorable for self-valuation). Results: Of 47 intervention group participants and 69 control group participants, 22 (46.8%) and 40 (57.9%), respectively, were women (P = .32). Paired assessments (at baseline and 6 months) were completed by 38 of 47 (80.9%) physicians in the intervention group and 53 of 69 (76.8%) in the control group. Between baseline and 6-month follow-up, participants in the intervention group showed a mean (SD) improvement of 1.59 (2.66) points (Cohen d = 0.54 [95% CI, 0.23-0.85]; P < .001) in IWPR, 1.22 (1.47) points (Cohen d = 0.68 [95% CI, 0.39-0.98]; P < .001) in burnout, and -1.25 points (2.09) (Cohen d = 0.68 [95% CI, -0.97 to -0.25]; P < .001) in self-valuation. Statistically significant changes in these measures were not observed in the control participants. In mixed-effects modeling comparing the intervention and control groups, being in the intervention group was associated with a 1.25-point improvement in IWPR (Glass d = -0.45 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.79]; P = .01), a 1.24-point improvement in burnout (Glass d = -0.70 [95% CI, -0.37 to -1.03]; P < .001), and a 0.97-point improvement in self-valuation (Glass d = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.09-0.86]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of an organizationally sponsored intervention consisting of a couples' workshop designed to mitigate the adverse IWPR for physicians, participation was associated with statistically significant improvements in IWPR, burnout, and self-valuation. Further development of interventions to mitigate adverse IWPR among physicians is warranted.
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.