Veterinary team relational coordination is associated with healthier perception of workplace psychological climate, increased job satisfaction, and reduced intention to leave
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To describe veterinary professionals' perceptions of relational coordination (RC) within their veterinary hospital and examine associations with perceived workplace psychological climate, job satisfaction, and intention to leave. Methods: All 4,676 employees working in 136 corporate-owned veterinary hospitals were invited to respond to an online survey. Measures included employees' perceptions regarding RC, workplace psychological climate, job satisfaction, and intention to leave their hospital. Ordinal logistic regressions examined associations between perceived RC and each of the aforementioned variables. Results: 578 employees from 114 veterinary hospitals participated. Participants perceived moderate RC with team members (mean, 3.91 out of 5), perceived their workplace psychological climate to be fair (mean, 3.23 out of 7), reported being satisfied with their job (mean, 70.42 out of 100), and did not intend to leave their hospital (mean, 2.26 out of 5). After controlling for hospital setting, stronger perceptions of RC were significantly associated with greater odds of rating workplace psychological climate at a more favorable level (OR, 5.78; 95% CI, 4.16 to 8.04) and rating job satisfaction at a higher level (OR, 5.12; 95% CI, 3.60 to 7.29), with lower odds of rating intention to leave their current hospital at a higher level (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.39). Conclusions: On average, employees reported moderately positive perceptions of each measure. Perceived RC within veterinary teams was associated with a healthier perception of workplace psychological climate, increased job satisfaction, and reduced intention to leave. Clinical Relevance: Findings highlight the important role that RC may have for veterinary practices, specifically in fostering employees' perceptions of their workplace psychological climate, enhancing job satisfaction, and reducing employee attrition.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".