Linking medical faculty stress/burnout to willingness to implement medical school curriculum change: a preliminary investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Balancing administrative demands from the medical school while providing patient support and seeking academic advancement can cause personal hardship that ranges from high stress to clinically recognizable conditions such as burnout. Regarding the importance of clinical faculties' burnout and its effects on different aspects of their professional career, this study was conducted and aimed to evaluate the relationship between willingness to change teaching approaches as characterized by a modified stage-of-change model and measures of stress and burnout. METHODS: This descriptive analytic study was conducted on 143 clinical faculty members of Tehran University of Medical Sciences in Iran. Participants were asked to complete three questionnaires: a modified stages of change questionnaire the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the General Health Questionnaire. Data were analysed by SPSS: 16 using non-parametric statistical tests such as multiple regression and ICC (intra-class coefficient) and Spearman correlation coefficient test. RESULT: A significant relationship was found between faculty members' readiness to change teaching approaches and the subscales of occupational burnout. Specifically, participants with low occupational burnout were more likely to be in the action stage, while those with high burnout were in the attitude or intention stage, which could be understood as not being ready to implement change. There was no significant correlation between general health scores and stage of change. CONCLUSIONS: We found it feasible to measure stages of change as well as stress/burnout in academic doctors. Occupational burnout directly reduces the readiness to change. To have successful academic reform in medical schools, it therefore would be beneficial to assess and manage occupational burnout among clinical faculty members.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.095 | 0.393 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".