ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Only private life settings positively affect quality of life of French women general practitioners.
Article in Women's health (London, England). 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn France, as women now represent the majority of the medical population, there is a discrepancy in the expected life mode for general practitioners and current society standards in a profession with excess of burnout and suicides. To date, there is only a few data available on the evaluation of quality of life of women general practitioner in France.
objectivesTo evaluate quality of life among this population, and to identify associated factors.
designCross-sectional study.
methodsParticipants were women general practitioners practicing in France. Our questionnaire was based on the World Health Organization - quality of life-BREF (26-item). The questionnaire was distributed through various professional networks. This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. Both simple and multivariable linear models were developed with sensitivity analysis.
resultsUpon 984 respondent women (mean age 36.2 ± 6.3), 704 (71.5%) were in private practice, 198 (20.1%) were employed and 82 (8.4%) had a mixed practice. They were mostly in couple (90.4%) with at least one child (73.6%). The number of working days and working hours depended on the practice type (p < 0.01). The average World Health Organization - quality of life was 63.0 ± 12.5, 66.2 ± 15.4 for domain 1 (physical), 62.6 ± 15.2 for domain 2 (psychological), 57.7 ± 19.6 for domain 3 (social) and 65.4 ± 13.4 for domain 4 (environment). No significant differences were observed in the global score or across the four domains according to the type of practice. Variables associated with the World Health Organization - quality of life were age (p < 0.01), daily working hours (p = 0.16), numbers of working days per month (p < 0.01), tobacco use (p = 0.11), presence of a secretary (p = 0.14), frequency of socializing with friends (p < 0.01), leisure time availability (p < 0.01), children (p = 0.04), relationship status (p < 0.01), number of weeks of vacations per year (p = 0.15), area of practice (p = 0.15) and place of residence (p = 0.06). After the multivariable model analysis, being in a couple (p = 0.02), having children (p = 0.03), leisure time availability (p < 0.001) and frequent socialization with friends (p < 0.001) were the remaining variables positively associated with the World Health Organization - quality of life. Advance in age (p = 0.002) and tobacco use (p = 0.04) were negatively associated to the World Health Organization - quality of life scores.
conclusionThe weight of private life settings appears more important in quality of life assessment in women general practitioners rather than professional settings.
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.