PREVALENCE OF BURNOUT SYNDROME IN HEALTHCARE WORKERS IN NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA, AND ASIA FROM 2018 TO 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores issues concerning prevalence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers in North and South America, and Asia from 2018 to 2022. Thus for this purpose, a great number of scientific sources that are related to the topic of the research were examined. Healthcare professionals face a tremendous strain during the performing of their activities that often may lead to stress and burnout syndrome. In particular, duties of healthcare workers include high responsibility for life and health of a patient, self-discipline, urgent decision-making, empathy, high productivity during extreme conditions, constant psychological and intellectual tension. During the past 30+ years, burnout syndrome was studied by scientists, practitioners, and also by general public all around the world. It should be noted, that nowadays a lot of employees (in particular, healthcare workers) are faced with rapid changes in our modern working life, namely, time pressure, pressure of higher productivity/quality of work, need to learn new skills, increasing demands of adaptation to new types of work, hectic jobs, etc., that in result may cause burnout syndrome. Burnout syndrome of healthcare workers is usually associated with poor quality of medical care and may lead to medical errors, exhaustion, inefficiency, and conflicts. High levels of burnout syndrome among medical professionals of different countries around the world vary from 7,4% to 66%. The issues concerning prevalence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers in North and South America, and Asia from 2018 to 2022 have not been sufficiently identified and also require more detailed research. Research of scientists that used the Maslach Burnout Inventory (hereinafter – the MBI), and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (hereinafter – the CBI) to research the burnout syndrome in healthcare workers of different specialties (including "Family Medicine") were included in this article. Based on the conducted research, the following conclusions can be reached: the research carried out to identify prevalence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers in North and South America, and Asia from 2018 to 2022 found out the presence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers ranging from 1,3% to 82,1%. Moreover, prevalence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers in North and South America varied from 1,3% to 73,5%, whereas in Asia it varied from 5,2% to 82,1%. Factors that associated with burnout in healthcare workers in North and South America, and Asia were examined. The majority of scientific studies on the identification of the prevalence of burnout syndrome in healthcare workers from 2018 to 2022: a) in North and South America have been conducted in Canada, the United States of America, the Federative Republic of Brazil, and the Argentine Republic, etc., whereas b) in Asia have been conducted in China, Japan, India, Pakistan, Iran, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Oman, Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, and Kazakhstan, etc. Intensivists, physiatrists, resident physicians, oncologists, general surgeons, internal medicine physicians, and emergency medicine physicians are special categories of healthcare workers who are at a high risk of formation of burnout syndrome that may develop due to the specific of professional activity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".