MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404038079 · doi:10.1080/20479700.2024.2417641

Mental health variables associated with job satisfaction among nurses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4404038079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammed Al Maqbali, Ciara Hughes, Eileen Danaher Hacker, Geoffrey L. Dickens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Healthcare Management · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisJob satisfactionPsychologyMental healthApplied psychologyNursingMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Nurses play a crucial role in healthcare, but increasing job dissatisfaction is raising concerns about its impact on patient care. Mental health problems are a key factor contributing to this dissatisfaction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to identify mental health variables associated with nurses' job satisfaction.Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO (October 1976–December 2023). Two researchers independently assessed study eligibility, and study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model was used to pool correlation coefficients from 112 studies.Results The meta-analysis found a small negative correlation between mental health problems and job satisfaction (r = −0.25). Emotional exhaustion, burnout, stress, depersonalization, depression, and anxiety were all modestly but significantly negatively correlated with job satisfaction.Conclusion This meta-analysis highlights the significant negative impact of mental health problems on nurses' job satisfaction. Healthcare institutions must prioritize nurses' mental well-being as it directly affects job satisfaction, nurse retention, and the quality of patient care.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Healthcare ManagementSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207