ArticleBMC health services research2025
Incentives on the motivation and job performance; insights from community health workers in Iran.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Building on Self-Determination Theory to Unravel the Motivational Drivers of Nurses and Rehabilitation Therapists in a Moroccan University Hospital: A Qualitative Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnhancing workforce motivation in primary health care systems is crucial to improving both program sustainability and service quality. Given this necessity, this study investigated how stakeholders perceive and prioritize financial and non-financial incentives, based on fundamental principles of motivation theory.
methodsThis study utilized a directed qualitative content analysis approach to rigorously examine data within the framework of Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory. The participants purposefully involved a sample of 25 individuals from the primary health care workforce in the Tehran province. To gather data, semi-structured interviews were carried out. The analysis began with an initial familiarization phase. Interview transcripts were read multiple times to enable a holistic understanding of content and context. Meaning units were identified and labeled based on the conceptual categories derived from the framework. The analysis was performed manually and with the assistance of ATLAS.ti software (version 8).
resultsAn analysis of the perspectives, 64% of participants reported a very high level of importance for financial incentives vs. non-financial. The majority agreed with the payment of a fixed salary in addition to performance-based incentives, considering both quantitative and qualitative criteria. Most important subthemes, including level of importance of incentives, mechanisms of incentives, interval of incentives, methods of incentives, administer of incentives, criteria of incentives, and adherence to fairness. Some participants perceived financial and non-financial factors as complementary elements in fostering motivation and enhancing performance. One key finding indicates that emphasizing non-financial incentives (respect, and prompt appreciation, outstanding employees), while also considering each individual's unique needs and circumstances, is crucial.
conclusionsThis study suggests a degree of flexibility in the boundaries between the two categories of Herzberg's theory, particularly in specific cultural and economic settings. Taken together, these results highlight the critical importance of designing integrated strategies that simultaneously address extrinsic and intrinsic incentives to enhance the performance of the health care workforce.
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.