ArticleBMJ open2025
Investigating discrepancies in perceptions regarding the provision of hospital rest and relaxation spaces in Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate discrepancies in perceptions regarding the accessibility and availability of rest and relaxation (R&R) spaces between hospital doctors in Scotland and NHS Scotland regional health boards (HBs), with the intention of informing best practices for organisational policy on the provision of R&R spaces both now and in the future.
designA qualitative study, through an inhabited institutionalism (II) lens, of semi-structured interviews of hospital doctors across the career continuum in Scotland and all NHS regional HBs in Scotland providing written information relating to R&R space provision.
settingNHS Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
participantsHospital doctors (n=30) who had participated in a larger qualitative study and provided specific insights on R&R spaces. All NHS Scotland regional HBs (n=14).
resultsAlthough HBs reported the provision of R&R spaces, numerous doctors reported R&R spaces had been removed, relocated or were inaccessible. Furthermore, limited awareness of their availability attributed to inadequate communication, compounded the issue. This divergence between institutional reporting and front-line experience can be interpreted through the lens of II, which posits that institutional polices are often interpreted and implemented differently.
conclusionsThis study emphasises how crucial R&R spaces are to promoting doctors' well-being especially during the time of high stress. HBs must not only guarantee the accessibility and physical availability of R&R spaces but also enhance their communication regarding the provision.
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.