Organizational culture predicts job satisfaction and perceived clinical effectiveness in pediatric primary care practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been a growing understanding that organizational culture is related to an organization's performance. However, few studies have examined organizational culture in medical group practices. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship of organizational culture on provider job satisfaction and perceived clinical effectiveness in primary care pediatric practices. RESEARCH DESIGN: This cross-sectional study included 36 primary care pediatric practices located in Connecticut. PARTICIPANTS: There were 374 participants in this study, which included 127 clinicians and 247 nonclinicians. MEASURES: Office managers completed a questionnaire that recorded staff and practice characteristics; all participants completed the Organizational Culture Scale, a questionnaire that assessed the practice on four cultural domains (i.e., group, developmental, rational, and hierarchical), and the Primary Care Organizational Questionnaire that evaluated perceived effectiveness and job satisfaction. RESULTS: Hierarchical linear models using a restricted maximum likelihood estimation method were used to evaluate whether the practice culture types predicted job satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. Group culture was positively associated with both satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. In contrast, hierarchical and rational culture were negatively associated with both job satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. These relationships were true for clinicians, nonclinicians, and the practice as a whole. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that practice culture is associated with job satisfaction and perceived clinical effectiveness and that a group culture was associated with high job satisfaction and perceived effectiveness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".