Liselotte N Dyrbye1, Daniel Satele, Tait Shanafelt. 1. Division of Primary Care Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine (Dr Dyrbye), Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research (Mr Satele), and Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine (Dr Shanafelt), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the well-being index (WBI) can identify US workers in distress and stratify quality of life (QOL). METHODS: We used data from 5392 US workers and 6880 physicians to evaluate the efficacy of the WBI and an expanded version of the WBI (eWBI) to identify individuals with distress (high fatigue, burnout, low QOL, and suicidal ideation) and high QOL. RESULTS: Individuals with distress were more likely to endorse each of the WBI items as well as a greater number of total items (all P < 0.001). The eWBI improved stratification among individuals with low scores and also identified individuals with high QOL in both samples. CONCLUSIONS: The eWBI appears to be a useful screening tool to identify individuals in distress across a variety of domains and identify individuals with high well-being.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the well-being index (WBI) can identify US workers in distress and stratify quality of life (QOL). METHODS: We used data from 5392 US workers and 6880 physicians to evaluate the efficacy of the WBI and an expanded version of the WBI (eWBI) to identify individuals with distress (high fatigue, burnout, low QOL, and suicidal ideation) and high QOL. RESULTS: Individuals with distress were more likely to endorse each of the WBI items as well as a greater number of total items (all P < 0.001). The eWBI improved stratification among individuals with low scores and also identified individuals with high QOL in both samples. CONCLUSIONS: The eWBI appears to be a useful screening tool to identify individuals in distress across a variety of domains and identify individuals with high well-being.
Authors: Alison L Chetlen; Tiffany L Chan; David H Ballard; L Alexandre Frigini; Andrea Hildebrand; Shannon Kim; James M Brian; Elizabeth A Krupinski; Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Nathan T Morrell; Erika D Sears; Mihir J Desai; Michael J Forseth; Walter B McClelland; James Chang; Sanjeev Kakar Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Vicki A Freedenberg; JiJi Jiang; Carla A Cheatham; Erica Ms Sibinga; Cynthia A Powell; Gerard R Martin; David M Steinhorn; Kathi J Kemper Journal: Glob Adv Health Med Date: 2020-09-22
Authors: Claire Collins; Els Clays; Esther Van Poel; Joanna Cholewa; Katica Tripkovic; Katarzyna Nessler; Ségolène de Rouffignac; Milena Šantrić Milićević; Zoran Bukumiric; Limor Adler; Cécile Ponsar; Liubove Murauskiene; Zlata Ožvačić Adžić; Adam Windak; Radost Asenova; Sara Willems Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Ankita Agarwal; Jen-Ting Chen; Craig M Coopersmith; Joshua L Denson; Neal W Dickert; Lauren E Ferrante; Hayley B Gershengorn; Adhiraj D Gosine; Bradley J Hayward; Navneet Kaur; Akram Khan; Courtney Lamberton; Douglas Landsittel; Patrick G Lyons; Mark E Mikkelsen; Nandita R Nadig; Anthony P Pietropaoli; Brian R Poole; Elizabeth M Viglianti; Jonathan E Sevransky Journal: Crit Care Explor Date: 2022-10-13
Authors: Sofia Gomez; Brian J Anderson; Hyunmin Yu; Jacob Gutsche; Juliane Jablonski; Niels Martin; Meeta Prasad Kerlin; Mark E Mikkelsen Journal: Crit Care Explor Date: 2020-10-21
Authors: K H J Lim; K Murali; K Kamposioras; K Punie; C Oing; M O'Connor; E Thorne; T Amaral; P Garrido; M Lambertini; B Devnani; C B Westphalen; G Morgan; J B A G Haanen; C Hardy; S Banerjee Journal: ESMO Open Date: 2021-06-30