MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341736783 · doi:10.1177/2050312116643907

The effects of distress and the dimensions of coping strategies on physicians’ satisfaction with competence

2016· article· en· W2341736783 on OpenAlex
Rein Lepnurm, Robert Nesdole, Juan Nicolás Peña-Sánchez

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoping (psychology)Competence (human resources)DistressClinical psychologyFamily medicinePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to (1) articulate the dimensions of Coping strategies used by physicians, and (2) determine whether Coping strategies alleviated Distress and enhanced Satisfaction with Competence. METHODS: Comprehensive questionnaires on factors associated with Satisfaction with Competence were sent to a stratified sample of 5300 physicians across Canada. The response rate was 57% with negligible bias. Factor analysis was used to articulate the dimensions of Coping strategies. The classic Baron and Kenny regression series was used to establish whether Coping mediates the effects of Distress on Satisfaction with Competence. Years in Practice, Self-Reported Health, and Duties of Physicians were control factors. RESULTS: A reliable 15-item measure of Coping was confirmed (α = .76) with four reasonably reliable dimensions: Collegiality (α = .80), Attitude (α = .63), Managing Work (α = .60), and Self-Care (α = .62). Physicians reported a mean Satisfaction with Competence of (M = 4.26 out of 6.0, standard deviation (SD) = 0.64) with General practitioners reporting slightly lower levels of Satisfaction with Competence than average. Conversely, chronic disease, clinical, and procedural specialists reported higher levels of Satisfaction with Competence. The mean Distress level for all physicians was (M = 3.66 out of 7.0, SD = 0.93). The highest levels of distress were reported by emergency physicians, general practitioners, and surgeons. Clinical specialists, anesthesiologists, and psychiatrists reported the lowest levels of distress. Physicians reported (M = 4.48 out of 7.0, SD = 0.78) as the mean level of Coping ability with clinical specialists and general practitioners reporting lower than average abilities to cope. Laboratory and chronic care specialists reported greater than average coping abilities. Regression analyses established Coping as a mediator of Distress which predicted physicians' Satisfaction with Competence. CONCLUSION: Four groups of coping strategies were significant in relieving the pressures of work: (1) Collegiality, (2) Self-Care, (3) Managing Work, and (4) Positive Attitude.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it