MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366090832 · doi:10.3390/healthcare11081145

The Complexity of Burnout Experiences among Care Aides: A Person-Oriented Approach to Burnout Patterns

2023· article· en· W4366090832 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yinfei Duan, Yuting Song, Trina Thorne, Alba Iaconi, Peter Norton, Carole A. Estabrooks

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBurnoutPsychologyNursingApplied psychologyMedicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Care aides working in nursing homes experience burnout attributed to various workplace stressors. Burnout dimensions (exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced professional efficacy) interact to form distinct burnout patterns. Using a person-oriented approach, we aimed to identify burnout patterns among care aides and to examine their association with individual and job-related factors. This was a cross-sectional, secondary analysis of the Translating Research in Elder Care 2019–2020 survey data collected from 3765 care aides working in Canadian nursing homes. We used Maslach Burnout Inventory to assess burnout and performed latent profile analysis to identify burnout patterns, then examined their associations with other factors. We identified an engaged pattern (43.2% of the care aide sample) with low exhaustion and cynicism and high professional efficacy; an overwhelmed but accomplished pattern (38.5%) with high levels of the three dimensions; two intermediate patterns—a tired and ineffective pattern (2.4%) and a tired but effective pattern (15.8%). The engaged group reported the most favorable scores on work environment, work-life experiences, and health, whereas the tired and ineffective group reported the least favorable scores. The findings suggest complex experiences of burnout among care aides and call for tailored interventions to distinct burnout patterns.

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)0.000
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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207