MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784488759 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3299w

Stress Factors Associated With Burnout Among Attending Physicians: A Cross-Sectional Study

2018· article· en· W2784488759 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yurika Kawamura, Ayumi Takayashiki, Makoto Ito, Takami Maeno, Emiko Seo, Tetsuhiro Maeno

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBurnoutCross-sectional studyFamily medicineStress (linguistics)Clinical psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Burnout in attending physicians is a crucial issue that may negatively impact patient outcomes, as well as affect the quality of training provided to residents. To investigate the association between burnout and stress-coping ability, we conducted a cross-sectional study of attending physicians. METHODS: From April 2013 to March 2014, we distributed an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire to 1,897 attending physicians who attended teaching-related training sessions and workshops. The questionnaire included the Maslach Burnout Inventory General Survey (MBI-GS, Japanese version) to evaluate burnout; the sense of coherence scale (SOC, Japanese version) to measure stress-coping ability, with higher scores indicating higher stress-coping ability; the Brief Scales for Job Stress (BSJS) to assess stress and buffering factors; demographic factors; mean weekly working hours; and factors related to instructing residents. The MBI-GS was used to determine the presence of physician burnout. Subjects were divided into tertiles based on SOC scores. We conducted logistic regression analysis of burnout using the following independent variables: physician experience, sex, mean weekly working hours, SOC group, mental workload, and reward from work. RESULTS: Of the 1,543 (81.3%) attending physicians who responded, 376 did not meet the inclusion criteria and 106 had missing data, thus 1,061 (55.9%) were analyzed. The prevalence of burnout was 17.2%. Physicians with burnout had significantly fewer years of experience as a doctor (P < 0.01), were more likely to be female (P < 0.01), worked more hours per week (P < 0.01), and had a lower SOC score (P < 0.01) than physicians without burnout. On the BSJS, the mean score of all stress factors was higher and that of buffering factors was lower in physicians with burnout (P < 0.01). The percentages of physicians with burnout were 35.7%, 12.8%, and 3.2% in the low, middle, and high SOC groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Using the high SOC group as a reference, the adjusted odds ratio for burnout in the low SOC group was 4.7 (95% confidence interval: 2.31 - 9.63) (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, burnout among attending physicians was significantly associated with SOC scores after adjustment for stress factors and buffering factors.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.478
GPT teacher head0.656
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207