ArticleHuman resources for health2025
Labour precariousness in the Mexican health workforce: taking to the surface a neglected problematic issue.
Article in Human resources for health, 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.
- Violence, Stigma, and Moral Injury in Nursing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis From 18 Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.Nursing inquiry · 2026Article
- Health insurance coverage in Mexico: progress, inequalities and remaining challenges towards UHC2030.Health research policy and systems · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle attention has been paid to quantifying job precariousness among health workers in low- and middle-income countries. Analytical models of human resources for health omit work precarity as a relevant phenomenon. However, analysing job precariousness is critical to improving health systems' performance.
methodsWe analysed pooled cross-sectional population-based data from Mexico's National Occupation and Employment Survey for 31,394 physicians and nurses between 2005 and 2022, representing almost 7, 8 million nationally throughout the study period. We used a pooled state and year fixed-effects multiple logistic regression to estimate the likelihood of having precarious employment for each survey year in both groups and according to the private/public employment sector. We conducted post hoc comparisons of quintiles of changes (2005-2022) in the adjusted percentage of labour precariousness according to the employment sector and of the private-public labour precariousness gap by state.
findingsThere was sustained growth in labour precariousness (from 58.7 and 49.0% in 2005 to 75.5% and 67.3% in 2022 among physicians and nurses, respectively). In both groups of professionals, labour precariousness was steadily higher in the private sector. However, the private-public gap narrowed to a greater extent and more accelerated among physicians than among nurses. The reduction in the private-public precariousness gap was not territorially random either (range - 39.5% to - 46.9%), with higher levels of convergence between both labour sectors, especially in the poorest socioeconomic regions.
conclusionsThe differences in the nursing and medical labour market composition have exposed the latter to the growth of precariousness due to their historical link with the private sector. The closing of the gap between public and private is a result of the recent expansion of precarious work in the latter. It is essential to develop regulatory policies to reduce precariousness and its effects on the health system applicable to both sectors.
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.