PubMed · 15768528
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Jay Tolson, Vicky Hallett, Alex Kingsbury. 2005-03-07. Hard lessons.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15768528/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The accumulation and use of power is crucial to the health policy process. This paper examines the power of the medical profession in the health policy arena, by analysing which actors are perceived as influential, and how influence is structured in health policy. It combines an analysis of policy networks and social networks, to examine positional and personal influence in health policy in the state of Victoria, Australia. In the sub-graph of the influence network examined here, those most widely regarded as influential are academics, medically qualified and male. Positional actors (the top politician, political advisor and bureaucrat in health and the top nursing official) form part of a core group within this network structure. A second central group consists of medical influentials working in academia, research institutes and health-related NGOs. In this network locale overall, medical academics appear to combine positional and personal influence, and play significant intermediary roles across the network. While many claim that the medical profession has lost power in health policy and politics, this analysis yields few signs that the power of medicine to shape the health policy process has been greatly diminished in Victoria. Medical expertise is a potent embedded resource connecting actors through ties of association, making it difficult for actors with other resources and different knowledge to be considered influential. The network concepts and analytical techniques used here provide a novel means for uncovering different types of influence in health policy.
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To assess burnout among clinical research coordinators (CRCs) and to determine which personal and job-related factors are associated with burnout. DESIGN: Random, stratified, cross-sectional mail survey. SETTING: CRCs from membership lists of clinical research organizations. SAMPLE: 252 CRCs in the United States. To be included in the study, participants must have been in their current position longer than six months and involved in clinical trial coordination or data management. Of 2,770 records, 900 CRCs were mailed questionnaires; 35% (316) responded, and 252 of those were eligible for analysis. Eligible respondents were Caucasian (86%), female (94%), and employed full-time (92%) in an oncology setting (71%). METHODS: Respondents completed mailed self-administered questionnaires measuring burnout, job satisfaction, personality characteristics, perceived work overload, and selected personal- and employment-related data. Data analyses included descriptive, univariate, and multivariate statistics. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLE: Burnout. FINDINGS: About 70% of respondents were satisfied with their job, and 74% would still choose the clinical research profession. Approximately 44% reported high emotional exhaustion, a component of burnout. Factors independently associated with high emotional exhaustion burnout were low satisfaction with job (p 0.0001), high perceived daily workload (p 0.0001), and low endurance personality (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Burnout is prevalent in CRCs. Job dissatisfaction, perceived daily work overload, low endurance, and nurturance personality traits were associated with high burnout. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses are involved significantly in clinical trial coordination. High burnout rates have potentially negative implications for data quality and productivity in clinical trial data management-important values for nursing and the clinical research profession.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.