IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i3p741-d312433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Burnout Syndrome and Meta-Analyses: Need for Evidence-Based Research in Occupational Health. Comments on Prevalence of Burnout in Medical and Surgical Residents: A Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health . 2019, 16 , doi:10.3390/ijerph16091479

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Chirico

    (Post-graduate School in Occupational Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy)

  • Nicola Magnavita

    (Department of Woman and Child Health and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Fondazione Policinico “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

In their meta-analysis of observational studies, Low et al. showed a high prevalence of burnout syndrome (BOS) among medical and surgical residents across the globe with an aggregate prevalence of burnout as 51.0% (CI: 45.0–57%). However, the sample size in many of the included studies was quite low (only 26 out of 47 included studies had a sample size of more than 100 participants), and almost all of the 47 studies reported a rate of respondents of less than 80% (43 out of 47, 91.4%). Furthermore, in many of them, the rate of respondents was unknown (5 out of 47) or less than 50% of eligible persons (23 out of 47 studies). As BOS is a self-reported syndrome, healthcare professionals who decided to participate in those studies were many of those affected by BOS, making the percentage of respondents potentially overstated due to the nonresponse bias. Policy decision-making in public health relies on evidence-based research; therefore, quality evaluation of studies in meta-analysis is essential to draw useful data for policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Chirico & Nicola Magnavita, 2020. "Burnout Syndrome and Meta-Analyses: Need for Evidence-Based Research in Occupational Health. Comments on Prevalence of Burnout in Medical and Surgical Residents: A Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res.," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-2, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:741-:d:312433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/741/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/3/741/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p:741-:d:312433. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.