Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32756483›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Measurement Invariance of the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) Across Seven Cross-National Representative Samples.

Leon T de Beer, Wilmar B Schaufeli, Hans De Witte, Jari J Hakanen, Akihito Shimazu, Jürgen Glaser, Christian Seubert, Janine Bosak, Jorge Sinval, Maksim Rudnev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Validity Evidence for the Secondary Symptoms of the Burnout Assessment Tool: A Brazilian Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Leon T de BeerWorkWell Research Unit, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, Potchefstroom 2531, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-6900-2192
Wilmar B SchaufeliResearch Unit Occupational & Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6070-7150
Hans De WitteResearch Unit Occupational & Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6691-517X
Jari J HakanenWorkability and Work Careers, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, 00032 Helsinki, Finland.
Akihito ShimazuDepartment of Policy Management, Keio University, Fujisawa 252-0882, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7172-0043
Jürgen GlaserDepartment of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Christian SeubertDepartment of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Janine BosakBusiness School, Dublin City University, Dublin 9, Ireland.
Jorge SinvalBusiness Research Unit (BRU-IUL), Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), 1649-026 Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2855-1360
Maksim RudnevNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-2714-3840

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the measurement invariance of the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) across seven cross-national representative samples. In this study, burnout was modeled as a second-order factor in line with the conceptual definition as a syndrome. The combined sample consisted of 10,138 participants from countries in Europe and Japan. The data were treated as ordered categorical in nature and a series of models were tested to find evidence for invariance. Specifically, theta parameterization was used in conjunction with the weighted least squares (mean- and variance adjusted) estimation method. The results showed supportive evidence that BAT-assessed burnout was invariant across the samples, so that cross-country comparison would be justifiable. Comparison of effect sizes of the latent means between countries showed that Japan had a significantly higher score on overall burnout and all the first-order factors compared to the European countries. The European countries all scored similarly on overall burnout with no significant difference but for some minor differences in first-order factors between some of the European countries. All in all, the analyses of the data provided evidence that the BAT is invariant across the countries for meaningful comparisons of burnout scores.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalBurnout, PsychologicalEuropeHumansInternationalityJapanPsychometricsReproducibility of Resultsburnoutmeasurement invariancestructural equation modelingwork overloadwork-related well-beingwork stress

Identifiers

PMID32756483
PMCPMC7432716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.