Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35190421›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Burnout, coping strategies and help-seeking in general practitioners: a two-wave survey study in Denmark.

Anette Fischer Pedersen, Peter Vedsted

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Anette Fischer PedersenResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark afp@ph.au.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-0253-3671
Peter VedstedResearch Unit for General Practice, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWork pressure remains an issue among general practitioners (GPs). Nevertheless, GPs rarely seek help for symptoms of burnout. The aim of this study was to examine whether burnout level was associated with coping strategies and help-seeking behaviour during time pressure.

designA two-wave nationwide survey (2016 and 2019) based on questionnaire data from 1059 GPs.

settingPrimary care in Denmark.

methodsBurnout was measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), whereas coping strategies and help-seeking behaviour were measured by questions developed for the study. A composite score of quartile points was calculated for the three subscales of the MBI subscales. A score ≥9 was categorised as high level of burnout, and the composite score of 2019 was used as outcome. Data were analysed with logistic regression adjusted for sex, age and composite burnout score in 2016.

resultsHigh scores in 2016 on four key factors were associated with increased risk of high composite burnout score in 2019. These factors were compromising work (OR

conclusionCertain coping strategies used in 2016 were associated with increased risk of high burnout score in 2019, whereas lower risk of high burnout was seen in the GPs seeking help. These findings are relevant to reduce burnout rates among GPs.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalGeneral PractitionersAdaptation, PsychologicalBurnout, PsychologicalCross-Sectional StudiesDenmarkHumansSurveys and Questionnairesgeneral medicine (see internal medicine)occupational & industrial medicineorganisational developmentquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID35190421
PMCPMC8860061
OpenAlexW4212988492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.