Relationship between Job Stress, Job Satisfaction, and Related Factors among Health Center Employees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objective: Job satisfaction and occupational stress are two factors affecting employees’ productivity at the workplace in developed organizations. Occupational stress causes various prevalent physical and psychological effects, which in turn leads to poor job satisfaction. Despite many studies in this field on health groups, less attention has been paid to health workers. Further research is thus needed to explore and explain how job stress and job satisfaction are related to personal work and organizational factors among health center workers. Materials and Methods: This analytic cross-sectional study was performed from winter 2018 to spring 2019 among health workers of a city in Markazi province, Iran. Data collection tools were demographic and individual characteristics questionnaire, Job Description Index (JDI) questionnaire, and Occupational Stress Questionnaire (OSQ, Davies). Data were analyzed using the SPSS software (version 20). Results: The results showed that occupational stress is generally higher in women (119/848) than in men (108/122), and women’s job satisfaction (242/450) is lower than that of men (262/682). In addition, there was a negative and significant relationship between occupational stress and job satisfaction (r=0.001, P=0.783) at the significance of level P<0.05. Multivariate regression findings also revealed that occupational stress can predict job satisfaction (β=-0.783, P=0.001). Moreover, the highest occupational stress and the lowest job satisfaction were related to healthcare workers. Conclusion: In general, stress and job satisfaction were obtained at a moderate level in this study, and there was a negative relationship between the two variables. Given that dissatisfaction is mainly seen in the discussion of promotions, salaries, and benefits, it is necessary to take measures to reduce stress, improve economic conditions, and create fair promotion conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".