Introduction Junior physicians often face high levels of work stress, burnout, and depression, largely due to challenging work conditions. Contradictory task demands – a specific job stressor where junior physicians are expected to fulfill conflicting goals simultaneously - has received limited attention, but may significantly impact their mental health and job satisfaction.

Objective This study aimed to identify key contradictory demands faced by junior physicians in specialty training and examine associations with physician health and well-being.

Methods Step-wise and multi-methods procedure comprising explorative interviews and standardized surveys. A convenience sample of junior physicians undergoing specialty training in Germany were surveyed. Thematic analyses of qualitative data as well as descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed.

Results Drawing upon seven in-depth interviews, experiences of key contradictory demands were extracted and consolidated into 19 distinct statements. 28 Survey responses were obtained with highest ratings for ‘Non-physician activities, additional tasks versus Focus on core clinical tasks’ as well as ‘General workload versus Regular working time’. Associations with physicians’ health and well-being outcomes were moderate and inconsistent.

Discussion Preliminary results shed light on experiences of contradictory task demands in clinical work among junior physicians. A broad spectrum of potentially incompatible or conflicting demands on the job was observed. The findings underscore the complexity of the clinical work environment, where multiple conflicting demands create a particularly challenging educational and work setting for junior physicians. The results may inform tailored approaches to mitigate work stress in this professional group.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This work was partially funded by the Munich Center for Health Sciences (MC-Health) to Matthias Weigl.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Prior to start, the study protocol was approved by the Ethics committee of the Medical Faculty of Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (No 17-305).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Source of Funding: This work was partially funded by the Munich Center for Health Sciences (MC-Health) to Matthias Weigl.

Conflicts of interests: MW, SB, and CQ do not report conflicts of interests.

Data sharing statement: Upon reasonable request, additional data can be obtained from the corresponding author (all data is in German language).

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding authors (MW).