Occupational burnout and depression among paediatric dentists in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Paediatric dentists in the United States may be at greater risk for occupational burnout and/or depression because of chronic stress associated with provision of paediatric dental care and increasing prevalence of females in the workforce. AIMS: To determine the prevalence of occupational burnout and/or depression among US paediatric dentists. DESIGN: A self-administered online anonymous survey was sent to members of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (n = 4735). The questionnaire consisted of seven demographic items, 22 items of Maslach Burnout Inventory (Three subscales: Emotional exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Personal accomplishment), and eight items of Patient Health Questionnaire-8. RESULTS: The survey had a response rate of 11.4% (females = 53%). Twenty-three per cent of respondents had high emotional exhaustion while fewer respondents had high depersonalization (12%) or low personal accomplishment (10%). Nine per cent fulfilled the study's definition of occupational burnout (high emotional exhaustion + high depersonalization). Seven per cent of respondents had moderate-to-severe depression and showed significant correlations (P < .05) with high emotional exhaustion, high depersonalization and low personal accomplishment. Two out of five respondents with occupational burnout also had moderate-to-severe depression. There were no gender differences in prevalence of burnout or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Few paediatric dentists had occupational burnout and/or depression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".