MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4307277390 · doi:10.20471/dec.2022.58.02.04

Burnout Syndrome in Psychiatrists in Slovakia: A National Survey

2022· article· en· W4307277390 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva Morovicsová, Lenka Valuš

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Psychiatry Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepersonalizationEmotional exhaustionBurnoutMental healthOccupational burnoutQuarter (Canadian coin)PsychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No study that would deal with the prevalence of burnout syndrome in psychiatrists has been carried out in Slovakia to date, even though it is a high-risk profession. We have therefore investigated the symptoms of burnout in physicians within all Slovak psychiatric workplaces, in relation to individual differences. The participants filled in the Maslach Burnout Inventory and the Questionnaire for Identification of Stress Level and Burnout Syndrome. We aimed to detect their levels of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment as well as physical, psychological, emotional, and social symptoms of work-related stress and burnout. The remaining items of our interest concerned the participants’ age, length of practice, gender, provision of the institutional emergency care, and type of workplace. Over one third of Slovak psychiatrists expressed a low degree of personal accomplishment, one quarter reported a high level of depersonalization and nearly one half suffered a high level of emotional exhaustion. Not only the levels of emotional and physical symptoms, but also the overall level of burnout, were significantly higher in female psychiatrists. More experienced psychiatrists as well as those who do not provide the institutional emergency care expressed higher levels of personal accomplishment. To address the issues revealed both in our study and the previous research we recommend implementation of measures focused on the support of mental health of healthcare workers across the whole society. In addition, more attention is needed to the active use of preventive measures at all psychiatric workplaces by both the employers and the psychiatrists themselves.

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)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Psychiatry Research→Same topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout→French-language works237,207→