The Role of Psychological Safety in Promoting Mental Well-Being in Dental Clinics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the role of psychological safety in promoting mental well-being among dental professionals. A qualitative research design was employed, utilizing semi-structured interviews with 34 dental professionals from diverse countries. Participants were recruited through online announcements, and interviews were conducted via video calls. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo software, with theoretical saturation guiding data collection. Key themes were identified, including supportive leadership, collegial relationships, workplace culture, mental well-being strategies, and patient interaction dynamics. The results revealed that supportive leadership, characterized by open communication and emotional support, significantly enhanced psychological safety. Collegial relationships, particularly peer support and team cohesion, played a crucial role in reducing workplace stress. A positive workplace culture that prioritized respect, inclusivity, and ethical conduct fostered a sense of security and belonging. Access to mental health resources and structured well-being programs further contributed to practitioners' psychological resilience. Managing emotional labor in patient interactions was identified as a key challenge, with participants emphasizing the need for training on coping strategies. These findings align with existing literature on psychological safety in healthcare, reinforcing the importance of organizational interventions to support mental well-being. Psychological safety is a fundamental component of workplace well-being in dental clinics, influencing both professional satisfaction and patient care quality. Dental organizations should implement leadership training, peer support programs, and mental health initiatives to create psychologically safe environments. Addressing emotional labor challenges and promoting a culture of respect and inclusivity can further enhance the well-being of dental professionals. Future research should explore the long-term impact of psychological safety interventions on mental health outcomes in dental settings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".