Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42652292›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026

Work Environment Factors and Subjective Well-Being Among Healthcare Professionals: A Structural Equation Modeling Study with Mediation Analysis.

Evija Nagle, Maksims Zolovs, Anna Nyberg, Iluta Skrūzkalne, Ieva Saukuma, Andrejs Ivanovs, Ieva Reine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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

7 authors.

Evija NagleStatistics Unit, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.
Maksims ZolovsStatistics Unit, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-9120-5869
Anna NybergDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, SE-751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.
Iluta SkrūzkalneStatistics Unit, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0009-0004-1763-4218
Ieva SaukumaFaculty of Social Sciences, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-6272-3867
Andrejs IvanovsStatistics Unit, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-7376-3776
Ieva ReineStatistics Unit, Riga Stradiņš University, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare professionals work in demanding psychosocial environments that may affect their subjective well-being and, consequently, the performance and sustainability of healthcare systems. Understanding how job demands and job resources are associated with healthcare professionals' well-being is important for developing organizational strategies that support workforce health and service quality.

methodsA cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted among 566 healthcare professionals in Latvia. Psychosocial work environment factors were assessed using a multidimensional instrument based on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, while subjective well-being was measured using the WHO-5 Well-Being Index. A comprehensive multiple-predictor mediation SEM was estimated using the WLSMV estimator. The primary covariate-adjusted model was based on 561 complete cases and simultaneously included all four psychosocial predictors, Work Engagement and Vitality as the mediator, subjective well-being as the outcome, and age, work experience, and professional position as covariates.

resultsThe comprehensive model demonstrated good fit. Job Satisfaction and Reward showed significant positive direct and indirect associations with subjective well-being and the strongest total association. Occupational Distress and Strain showed significant negative indirect and total associations, whereas their direct associations were not statistically significant. Autonomy and Work Control showed a significant positive indirect association and a significant positive total association, while its direct association was not statistically significant. Organizational Trust and Support demonstrated a positive indirect association but a negative direct association, whereas its total association was not statistically significant, indicating inconsistent mediation.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that psychosocial work environment factors are meaningfully associated with subjective well-being among healthcare professionals. Job Satisfaction and Reward, Autonomy and Work Control, and Occupational Distress and Strain appear to be particularly relevant factors. Work Engagement and Vitality may serve as an indirect pathway linking selected work environment factors to subjective well-being; however, given the cross-sectional design, these findings should be interpreted as statistical associations rather than evidence of causal mediation.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansJob SatisfactionLatent Class AnalysisMaleMediation AnalysisMiddle AgedOccupational StressPsychological Well-BeingWorking Conditionshealthcare professionalsjob demands–resources modelmediation analysispsychosocial work environmentstructural equation modelingsubjective well-being

Identifiers

PMID42652292
PMCPMC13512546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.