Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42458388›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2026

Healthcare workforce mobility and organisational turnover in Sweden, 2014-2024: a multi-method analysis across occupations and sectors.

Hanne Berthelsen, Linda Corin, Constanze Leineweber, Sara Stjernlöf, Tuija Muhonen, Hugo Westerlund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hanne BerthelsenCentre for Work Life and Evaluation Studies (CTA) & Section 4, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Nordenskiöldsgatan 1, Malmö, 205 06, Sweden. Hanne.Berthelsen@mau.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4573-4548
Linda CorinInstitute of Stress Medicine, Region Västra Götaland, Carl Skottsbergs gata 22B, Göteborg, 413 19, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6056-2190
Constanze LeineweberDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, 106 91, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8433-2405
Sara StjernlöfInstitute of Stress Medicine, Region Västra Götaland, Carl Skottsbergs gata 22B, Göteborg, 413 19, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-7600-654X
Tuija MuhonenCentre for Work Life and Evaluation Studies (CTA) & Department of School Development and Leadership, Faculty of Education and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, 205 06, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5972-4933
Hugo WesterlundDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, 106 91, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8806-5698

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLabour shortages and high staff turnover pose major challenges for healthcare systems, yet most existing research relies on cross-sectional data, focuses on single occupations, and examines intention to leave rather than actual mobility. To address these gaps, this two-part study investigates healthcare staff mobility patterns across public and private employers and occupational groups in Sweden over the past decade (labour market mobility perspective), while also examining types of organisational turnover and the exit destinations of staff who voluntarily left their positions (an organisational turnover perspective).

methodsWe employed a quantitative multi-method design covering four occupational groups (medical doctors, registered nurses, assistant nurses, and other licensed healthcare occupations). Consistent with the two-part design, the study combines two complementary components: (i) a national cohort dataset enabling analyses of occupational mobility and transitions between employers (Study A; labour market perspective), and (ii) register-based turnover data combined with organisational exit survey data from a large regional public healthcare provider (Study B; organisational perspective). Together, these two substudies capture mobility at both societal and organisational levels.

resultsStudy A showed that healthcare staff mobility remained relatively stable over the past decade, but patterns varied notably by occupation. Most transitions occurred between public and private employment, with private sector employees showing the highest mobility. Nursing staff moved mainly between different public employments, in contrast to the other two occupational groups. Relatively few employees changed occupations, but those who did mostly switched to non-healthcare occupations. Study B revealed that external turnover rates (i.e., employees leaving the regional organisation) exceeded internal rates (i.e., employees changing jobs within the organisation) across all years and occupations; registered nurses had the highest average external turnover rate (8%), and an upward trend was observed for assistant nurses. While most had secured new jobs when leaving, many, especially assistant nurses, left without knowing their future employment situation.

conclusionHealthcare staff mobility patterns in Sweden have remained relatively stable from 2014 to 2024, yet distinct patterns across various occupational groups reveal structural vulnerabilities. By integrating labour market and organisational perspectives, this study shows that mobility is not uniform but varies across occupations, sectors, and types of exit pathways.

Indexed as

Career MobilityHealth PersonnelPersonnel TurnoverCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPrivate SectorPublic SectorSwedenActual turnoverExit patternsHealthcareHuman resources managementPublic healthSectoral mobility

Identifiers

PMID42458388
PMCPMC13377862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.