To explore: (1) dietetic and nutritional science students' attitudes toward working with older adults and the factors affecting those attitudes; (2) the differences in attitudes between students who preferred to work with older adults and those who did not; (3) factors affecting self-efficacy to work with them; and (4) factors influencing current preference to work with older adults.
CER 32 can be defined as the direct comparison of existing interventions with proven efficacy to determine which work best for whom and which pose the greatest benefits and harms.
For both professions, the models for explaining self-efficacy in relation to work and safety showed that higher self-efficacy was evidenced among those who perceived a low level of physical exertion and who reported a stronger safety climate.
Perceived self-efficacy in relation to work and safety was focused, such as handling most situations at work, adjusting work tasks and to influence safety.
This implies that the work ability was positively associated with being a woman and by reporting a higher degree of personal safety, higher self-efficacy in relation to work and safety, and higher musculoskeletal wellbeing (Table 4).
At the same time, student attitudes toward learning (student epistemologies; Schommer 1990 , 1993, student self-efficacy (confidence in ability to work effectively in a particular context; Lawson et al., 2007), and student attitudes about science (Osborne, 2003) have been demonstrated to be important factors affecting students' success in the science classroom.
Primary outcome measures are self efficacy of patients concerning return to work, and GPs' use of ICPC code Z05 (work problems) and registration of patients' occupation.
French validation of two different (10 and 19 items) Return To Work Self-Efficacy Scale (RTWSE).
A major focus, especially in the self-efficacy intervention, was the motivation to work with oneself and one's life situation.
Perceptions of personal safety, self-efficacy and musculoskeletal wellbeing contributed to work ability for assistant nurses (Radj of 0.36, p < 0.001), while for care aides, the safety climate, seniority and age contributed to work ability (Radj of 0.29, p = 0.001).
