Empirical Assessment of Well-Being: The Stanford Model of Occupational Wellbeing.

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Bryan D Bohman, Maryam S Makowski, Hanhan Wang, Nikitha K Menon, Tait D Shanafelt, Mickey T Trockel
{"title":"Empirical Assessment of Well-Being: The Stanford Model of Occupational Wellbeing.","authors":"Bryan D Bohman, Maryam S Makowski, Hanhan Wang, Nikitha K Menon, Tait D Shanafelt, Mickey T Trockel","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000006025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Stanford Model of Occupational Wellbeing (Stanford Model) hypothesizes that occupational well-being is driven by 3 reciprocally related domains: workplace efficiency, culture of wellness, and individual factors. The current analysis assesses the key elements of this model with cross-sectional empirical data.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In fall 2020 and spring 2022, well-being surveys were distributed to all Stanford School of Medicine clinical faculty working at 50% or more of full-time equivalent. A total of 1,909 clinical faculty were invited to complete the 2020 survey and 2,251 to complete the 2022 survey. The survey assessed burnout and professional fulfillment, along with 9 hypothesized determinants, as occupational well-being outcome indicators. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine whether these determinants grouped well into the 3 domains described by the model. Domain scores were created based on factor analysis groupings of the scores for the determinants in each domain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,909 clinical faculty invited to complete the 2020 survey, 1,479 (78%) participated. Of the 2,251 clinical faculty invited in 2022, 1,552 (69%) participated. The associations of the 3 domain scores with burnout and professional fulfillment were moderate for workplace efficiency (r = 0.42-0.49; P < .001) and large for culture of wellness (r = 0.51-0.63; P < .001) and individual factors (r = 0.52-0.72; P < .001). Domain scores accounted for 45% and 50% of the variance in professional fulfillment and 56% and 59% of variance in burnout in 2020 and 2022 data, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results provide empirical evidence to support a widely adopted conceptual model of occupational well-being, including categorization of the hypothesized determinants of well-being into 3 domains, correlations among the domains, and association of the domain scores with burnout and professional fulfillment. Further research is needed to test causal relationships hypothesized by the model.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000006025","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The Stanford Model of Occupational Wellbeing (Stanford Model) hypothesizes that occupational well-being is driven by 3 reciprocally related domains: workplace efficiency, culture of wellness, and individual factors. The current analysis assesses the key elements of this model with cross-sectional empirical data.

Method: In fall 2020 and spring 2022, well-being surveys were distributed to all Stanford School of Medicine clinical faculty working at 50% or more of full-time equivalent. A total of 1,909 clinical faculty were invited to complete the 2020 survey and 2,251 to complete the 2022 survey. The survey assessed burnout and professional fulfillment, along with 9 hypothesized determinants, as occupational well-being outcome indicators. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine whether these determinants grouped well into the 3 domains described by the model. Domain scores were created based on factor analysis groupings of the scores for the determinants in each domain.

Results: Of 1,909 clinical faculty invited to complete the 2020 survey, 1,479 (78%) participated. Of the 2,251 clinical faculty invited in 2022, 1,552 (69%) participated. The associations of the 3 domain scores with burnout and professional fulfillment were moderate for workplace efficiency (r = 0.42-0.49; P < .001) and large for culture of wellness (r = 0.51-0.63; P < .001) and individual factors (r = 0.52-0.72; P < .001). Domain scores accounted for 45% and 50% of the variance in professional fulfillment and 56% and 59% of variance in burnout in 2020 and 2022 data, respectively.

Conclusions: These results provide empirical evidence to support a widely adopted conceptual model of occupational well-being, including categorization of the hypothesized determinants of well-being into 3 domains, correlations among the domains, and association of the domain scores with burnout and professional fulfillment. Further research is needed to test causal relationships hypothesized by the model.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信