Burnout in Japanese Internists and Primary Care Physicians in 2024: The Prevalence and Risk Factors Using Structural Equation Modeling
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the prevalence of burnout and identify its associated risk factors using structural equation modeling (SEM). Patients A cross-sectional web-based survey targeting members of the American College of Physicians Japan Chapter (ACP-JC) was conducted in March 2024. The survey included the Mini Z 2.0 for burnout assessment, Emotional Vulnerability Scale, and Japanese version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS-J). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the demographic and workplace characteristics, and SEM with maximum likelihood estimation was employed to explore the relationships between resilience, emotional vulnerability, teamwork, and burnout. Results Of the 1,066 invited physicians, 103 (9.7%) responded to the survey. Burnout symptoms were reported by 26.2% of the participants. An SEM analysis indicated significant negative associations between resilience (standardized coefficient: -0.29, p=0.007), teamwork (standardized coefficient: -0.32, p<0.001), and burnout, whereas emotional vulnerability showed no significant associations (standardized coefficient: 0.05, p=0.630). Conclusion Approximately one in four Japanese internists and primary care physicians reported burnout symptoms. Resilience and teamwork have emerged as key protective factors, thus underscoring the importance of fostering supportive workplace environments. Therefore, interventions to enhance resilience and strengthen workplace support systems are recommended to mitigate burnout.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it