MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103491982 · doi:10.5430/jha.v3n4p20

Risk of burnout among emergency physicians at a tertiary care centre in Saudi Arabia

2014· article· en· W2103491982 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdulmohsen Alsaawi, Khaled Alrajhi, Saad Albaiz, Mohammed Al‐Sultan, Majid Alsalamah, Shoeb Qureshi, Abdullah Alanazi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutDepersonalizationMedicineEmotional exhaustionTertiary careFamily medicineEmergency departmentObservational studyEmergency medicineNursingClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Emergency Medicine physicians are shown to be at increased risk of burnout. In this study, we aimed to assess the risk of burnout among emergency physicians working at one of the largest Emergency Departments in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is an observational, cross-sectional study based on a structured questionnaire Maslach Burnout Inventory- Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS), which has been previously tested and validated extensively. The study targeted all physicians in the Emergency Department (ED) at a tertiary medical center in Riyadh. A total of 72 emergency physicians were included in the study. Results: Overall, 53 (74%) out of 72 subjects filled the questionnaire. Out of the 53 respondents, 45 (85%) were males and eight (15%) females. The years of practice experience ranged from six months to 24 years, with a median of seven years. Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey subscale results: Emotional Exhaustion (EE): The mean EE score was 2.72 (SD 1.28), with 21 participants (40%) in the high-risk zone. Depersonalization (DP): The mean DP score was 1.86 (SD 1.31), with 21 participants (40%) in the high-risk zone. Personal Accomplishment (PA): The mean PA score was 4.5 (SD 0.9), with 17 participants (32%) in the high-risk zone. Conclusion: Our results are consistent with previous literature in showing that emergency physicians are at a moderate to high risk of burnout. Decision makers should take serious steps to address the threat, in order to minimize the risk of burnout and its impact on physicians as well as the patient they care for.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207