Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34969041›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Reliability and validity study of the Thai adaptation of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (CBI-SS) among preclinical medical students at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand.

Wasit Wongtrakul, Yodying Dangprapai, Nattha Saisavoey, Naratip Sa-Nguanpanich

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Psychometric Properties and Factor Structure of the Slovak Version of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wasit WongtrakulDepartment of Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-9732-6354
Yodying DangprapaiDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4437-2351
Nattha SaisavoeyDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-6278-3440
Naratip Sa-NguanpanichDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Siriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Burnout syndrome is a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, professional efficacy and cynicism. A significant proportion of medical students reported having burnout syndrome during their training in medical education. Several tools including the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (CBI-SS) are considered to be a valid measurement of burnout syndrome in medical students. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the CBI-SS for assessing burnout syndrome among preclinical medical students in Thailand. This study was conducted during February to March 2019 at the Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University (Bangkok, Thailand), which is Thailand's largest and oldest medical school, and Thailand's largest national tertiary referral center. After receiving formal permission to do so from the copyright owner, the original English language version of the CBI-SS was translated to Thai language using an internationally recommended and accepted forward-backward translation protocol. The Thai version of the CBI-SS (Thai CBI-SS) comprises 25 items, including 6 items for personal burnout, 7 items for study-related burnout, 6 items for colleague-related burnout, and 6 items for teacher-related burnout. Standardized Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to evaluate internal consistency reliability, and correlation coefficient was computed to determine test-retest reliability. A total of 414 preclinical medical students participated in this study. Due to sub-optimal factor weights (<0.50), items 6, 10 and 17 were excluded. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the 22-item Thai CBI-SS for personal, study-related, colleague-related, and teacher-related burnout were 0.898, 0.896, 0.910 and 0.900 respectively. The correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability after three weeks were 0.820, 0.870, 0.821, and 0.787 for personal, study-related, colleague-related, and teacher-related burnout, respectively. Maximum likelihood analysis with oblimin rotation indicated four main components, and confirmatory factor analysis revealed good fit indices of the Thai CBI-SS. Confirmatory factor analysis showed good fit indices of CBI-SS domains (χ2/df = 2.39; CFI = 0.957; GFI = 0.909; RMSEA = 0.058; TLI = 0.949; and NFI = 0.928). The convergent validity analysis using the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and the Composite Reliability (CR) was adequate for all dimensions (personal: AVE = 0.626, CR = 0.893; study-related: AVE = 0.601, CR = 0.899; colleague-related: AVE = 0.677, CR = 0.913; teacher-related: AVE = 0.606, CR = 0.900). The HTMT values for all variables are in the range from 0.315 to 0.833, confirming the discriminant validity. The Thai CBI-SS was found to be a valid and reliable tool for evaluating burnout syndrome in preclinical medical students in Thailand.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAlgorithmsBurnout, PsychologicalFemaleHumansLanguageLikelihood FunctionsMaleModels, StatisticalPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsRural PopulationSchools, MedicalThailand

Identifiers

PMID34969041
PMCPMC8717990
OpenAlexW4200065708

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.