Introduction The five major personality traits are crucial in how individuals approach their work, especially in the medical sector. This study examines how these traits influence workplace well-being indicators, including work capacity, psychological distress, sleep problems, and suicidal thoughts. Materials and Methods Survey conducted through an online self-questionnaire using “Google Forms,” based on validated psychological tests. The target population consisted of resident doctors and recently graduated specialists affiliated with Ibn Rochd University Hospital in Casablanca. Results 88 doctors participated (15%). The most predominant personality trait was agreeableness (42.04%), followed by conscientiousness (31.81%), neuroticism (17.04%), openness (9.09%), and no extraversion trait. Doctors specializing in psychiatry-child psychiatry, occupational medicine, and oncology-radiation therapy, who exhibited an agreeable personality trait, seemed to experience better workplace well-being, with satisfactory work capacity (40.54%), absence of psychological distress (62.16%), few or no sleep problems (54.05%), and no suicidal thoughts (83.78%). Conversely, doctors primarily specializing in cardiology and radiology, displaying a neuroticism personality trait, appeared to have lower workplace well-being, with slightly to significantly reduced work capacity (60%), frequent psychological distress (93.33%), moderate sleep problems (46.67%), and the presence of suicidal thoughts (53.33%). Discussion Limited research results suggest that doctors with a high level of neuroticism and low conscientiousness tend to have lower professional well-being. Conversely, high extraversion and agreeableness are often associated with better well-being. Conclusion The study underscores the importance of considering doctors’ personality traits to improve their working conditions. It sheds light on an essential aspect of physicians’ occupational health and paves the way for future research and interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Youabd et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: