Summary of a hierarchical ordered logistic regression analysis with gut feeling categories used as outcome
| Model 1* | Model 2† | |||
| OR (95% CI) | P value | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
| Sex | ||||
| Males versus females | 0.88 (0.63 to 1.24) | 0.473 | 0.87 (0.62 to 1.23) | 0.435 |
| Age | 0.98 (0.96 to 1.00) | 0.101 | 0.98 (0.96 to 1.00) | 0.107 |
| Practice organisation | ||||
| Solo practice versus group practice | 1.82 (1.23 to 2.69) | 0.003 | 1.86 (1.25 to 2.75) | 0.002 |
| Empathy‡ | ||||
| Second quartile versus first | 1.76 (1.13 to 2.74) | 0.012 | 1.71 (0.99 to 2.94) | 0.054 |
| Third quartile versus first | 2.47 (1.57 to 3.89) | <0.001 | 2.29 (1.33 to 3.93) | 0.003 |
| Fourth quartile versus first | 3.99 (2.51 to 6.34) | <0.001 | 4.12 (2.38 to 7.11) | <0.001 |
| Burn-out | ||||
| Burned-out versus not burned-out | 1.29 (0.90 to 1.83) | 0.165 | 1.22 (0.63 to 2.34) | 0.555 |
| Empathy quartiles x burn-out | ||||
| Second quartile versus first x burn-out | 1.10 (0.43 to 2.83) | 0.840 | ||
| Third quartile versus first x burn-out | 1.35 (0.50 to 3.66) | 0.560 | ||
| Fourth quartile versus first x burn-out | 0.84 (0.30 to 2.30) | 0.728 | ||
*Model 1 included sex, age, practice organisation and burn-out as covariates.
†Model 2 included the same covariates as model 1 besides interaction variables between empathy quartiles and burn-out.
‡Empathy quartiles were represented as three dummy variables with first (lowest) quartile serving as the reference group.