Job Satisfaction Among Young Board-Certified Surgeons at Academic Centers in Europe and North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify independent factors influencing job satisfaction of academic surgeons within their first 10 years after board certification. BACKGROUND DATA: Job satisfaction is increasingly recognized as a crucial factor for high performance of individuals and teams in most organizations. Sophisticated tools are now available to assess job satisfaction in medicine. METHODS: A survey among 439 faculty surgeons from 16 European countries, United States, and Canada was conducted in 2011. Satisfaction at work was analyzed using the validated Global Job Satisfaction (GJS) instrument (score range, -36 to +36), modified to an extended version (eGJS) (score range, -87 to +87) covering additional personal and environmental factors. Independent factors were identified with multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Response rate was high at 59% (439/744). Median age of responders was 39 years, with 17% women. North American surgeons scored higher on the eGJS when compared with Europeans (median: 21 vs. 33, respectively, P < 0.001). The surgical specialty with the highest median eGJS score was colorectal, whereas general surgery scored lowest (median: 33 vs 7, respectively, P = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, independent factors of high job satisfaction included protected time for research (odds ratio [OR]: 9), good team relationship (OR: 7), female sex (OR: 5), having a partner (OR: 4), feeling enthusiastic about work (OR: 4), being pleased with life accomplishments (OR: 4), having the standard of living one deserves (OR: 3), and clinical autonomy (OR: 3). In contrast, independent predictors of poor job satisfaction were feeling frustrated by work (ie, a burnout item) (OR: 37), worrying about personal life at work (OR: 3), and having to work too many weekends (OR: 3). CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction in young faculty members mostly relates to research opportunities, clinical autonomy, burnout, and lifestyle. Understanding satisfaction factors may improve productivity and competence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".