ArticleBMJ open2026
Associations between adverse working hours and nurses' sickness absence: a longitudinal analysis of e-roster data from acute hospital wards.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
objectiveTo examine the associations between registered nurses' shift work patterns and sickness absence in hospital inpatient wards.
designRetrospective longitudinal study using 1.4 million e-roster and sickness absence records analysed with logistic mixed-effects models.
settingAll adult acute inpatient hospital wards in two large healthcare organisations (Trusts) in England.
participantsRegistered nurses (N=7515) working across 95 adult acute wards in 2015-2020. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Nurses' sickness absence in relation to the shift pattern configurations worked in the previous 7 days. Logistic mixed-effects models were adjusted for total working hours, bank hours, previous sickness and part-time status.
resultsHigher odds of sickness absence were significantly associated with each additional rest period of fewer than 11.5 hours (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.27, p<0.001), change between day and night shifts (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.13, p<0.001) and spell of 3 or more consecutive shifts (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.32, p<0.001) in the previous 7 days. By accounting for nonlinearity, analyses revealed that working 70% of shifts as ≥12-hour shifts and 100% of shifts as night shifts were associated with increased odds of sickness (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.53 to 1.84 and OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.13, respectively) when compared with working none of these shift types. Sensitivity analysis using 28-day exposure windows did not change the direction of effects; however, the magnitude and significance of some associations attenuated.
conclusionsThis study highlights the organisational consequences of adverse working hours arrangements for registered nurses working in hospital wards. Short recovery periods, frequent shift rotations, consecutive working spells and high proportions of long and night shifts were associated with higher odds of sickness absence, with associations most apparent over 7-day exposure windows. Overall, these findings can inform shift planning policies that better support staff well-being through proactive management of sickness absence.
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.