A person's meat consumption is often determined by their values and preferences. To identify and evaluate evidence addressing health-related values and preferences regarding meat consumption. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences Abstracts, International System for Agricultural Science and Technology, and Food Science and Technology Abstracts were searched from inception to July 2018 without language restrictions. Pairs of reviewers independently screened search results and included quantitative and qualitative studies reporting adults' health-related values and preferences regarding meat consumption. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were synthesized into narrative form, and summaries were tabulated and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Of 19 172 initial citations, 41 quantitative studies (38 addressed reasons for meat consumption and 5 addressed willingness to reduce meat consumption) and 13 qualitative studies (10 addressed reasons for meat consumption and 4 addressed willingness to reduce meat consumption) were eligible for inclusion. Thirteen studies reported that omnivores enjoy eating meat, 18 reported that these persons consider meat an essential component of a healthy diet, and 7 reported that they believe they lack the skills needed to prepare satisfactory meals without meat. Omnivores are generally unwilling to change their meat consumption. The certainty of evidence was low for both “reasons for meat consumption” and “willingness to reduce meat consumption in the face of undesirable health effects.” Limited generalizability of findings to lower-income countries, low-certainty evidence for willingness to reduce meat consumption, and limited applicability to specific types of meat (red and processed meat). Low-certainty evidence suggests that omnivores are attached to meat and are unwilling to change this behavior when faced with potentially undesirable health effects. None. (PROSPERO: CRD42018088854)

Background: Physician satisfaction is a multidimensional concept related to many factors. Despite the wide range of research regarding factors affecting physician satisfaction in different European countries, there is a lack of literature reviews analyzing and summarizing current evidence. The aim of the article is to synthetize the literature studying the factors associated with physician satisfaction. Methods: We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to January 2017. The eligibility criteria included: (1) target population: physicians working in European hospitals; (2) quantitative research aimed at assessing physician satisfaction and associated factors; (3) use of validated tools. We performed a narrative synthesis. Results: After screening 8585 records, 368 full text articles were independently checked and finally 24 studies were included for qualitative analysis. The included studies surveyed 20,000 doctors from 12 European countries. The tools and scales used in the analyzed research to measure physician satisfaction varied to a large extent. We extracted all pre-specified factors, reported as statistically significant/non-significant. Analyzed factors were divided into three groups: personal, intrinsic and contextual factors. The majority of factors are modifiable and positively associated with characteristics of contextual factors, such as work-place setting/work environment. In the group of work-place related factors, quality of management/leadership, opportunity for professional development and colleague support have been deemed statistically significant in numerous studies. Conclusions: We identified more studies appraising the effect of contextual factors (such as work environment, work-place characteristics), highlighting a positive association between those factors and physician satisfaction, compared with personal and intrinsic factors. Numerous studies confirmed statistically significant associations between physician satisfaction and quality of management, professional development and colleague support/team climate. Due to the health workforce crisis, knowledge regarding physician satisfaction and associated factors is essential to healthcare managers and policy makers for more stable human resources management.

Background: Despite the wide range of studies concerning physician satisfaction in different European countries, there is a lack of literature reviews synthesizing and analyzing current evidence evaluating satisfaction of physicians working in European hospitals. The goal of our research was to provide a general overview of the studies in this area and their results. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to January 2017 including both MESH/Emtree terms and free text words related to the subject with no language restrictions. The eligibility criteria included: (i) target population: physicians working in European hospitals, (ii) quantitative research aimed at assessing physician satisfaction and (iii) validated tools. We performed a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Results: A total of 8585 abstracts and 368 full text articles were independently screened by 2 reviewers against inclusion/exclusion criteria. Finally 61 studies were eligible for qualitative analysis. Included studies enrolled a total of 50 001 physicians from 17 countries. Sample sizes varied between 54 and 7090 participants (median: 336). According to our review similar to 59% of physicians working in European hospitals are overall satisfied, 3.54 was the mean satisfaction among studies reporting data on a scale from 1 to 5, 4.81 for studies with a scale from 1 to 7, 6.12 among studies reporting data on a scale from 1 to 10, and 59.65 among studies with a scale from 0 to 100. Conclusions: The level of physician satisfaction in Europe is moderate. There is a large variety of tools and scales used to assess it.

Objectives. Human resource management is the most important function in the management of organizations and significantly affects the quality of work-life (QWL). Recently, the health sector started to be interested in the QWL among doctors. The study aim was to assess the QWL among Polish medical residents. Methods. The questionnaire for the medical residents was prepared using data acquired from a review of the international literature. In October 2017, the questionnaires were completed twice by 10 residents with a 2-week interval to assess the inter-rater reliability. The online questionnaire was distributed between April and May 2018. Results. A total of 243 doctors responded, over one-third of whom were men. The QWL was very high for 2.06% of the participants, high for 23.87%, moderate for 27.16%, low for 38.27% and very low for 8.64%. Among the factors that significantly relate to the QWL are the number of working hours per week (p = 0.007) and the general quality of life (p = 0.000). Conclusion. Low QWL is the result of inadequate management in Polish hospitals and residents’ QWL still needs to be improved. We propose to conduct such a survey periodically among all young medical doctors to systematically improve their QWL.

Aim: To assess the effectiveness of perioperative psychological interventions provided to patients with clinically severe obesity undergoing bariatric surgery regarding weight loss, BMI, quality of life, and psychosocial health using the Bayesian approach. Methods: We considered randomised trials that assessed the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative psychological interventions in people with clinically severe obesity undergoing bariatric surgery. We searched four data sources from inception to 3 October 2021. The authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted a meta-analysis using a Bayesian approach. PROSPERO: CRD42017077724. Results: Of 13,355 identified records, we included nine studies (published in 27 papers with 1060 participants (365 males; 693 females, 2 people with missing data)). Perioperative psychological interventions may provide little or no benefit for BMI (the last reported follow-up: MD [95% credible intervals] = −0.58 [−1.32, 0.15]; BF₀₁ = 0.65; 7 studies; very low certainty of evidence) and weight loss (the last reported follow-up: MD = −0.50 [−2.21, 0.77]; BF₀₁ = 1.24, 9 studies, very low certainty of evidence). Regarding psychosocial outcomes, the direction of the effect was mainly inconsistent, and the certainty of the evidence was low to very low. Conclusions: Evidence is anecdotal according to Bayesian factors and uncertain whether perioperative psychological interventions may affect weight-related and psychosocial outcomes in people with clinically severe obesity undergoing bariatric surgery. As the results are ambiguous, we suggest conducting more high-quality studies in the field to estimate the true effect, its direction, and improve confidence in the body of evidence.