ArticleThe Permanente journal2023
Burnout in Medicine: Are We Asking the Right Questions?
Article in The Permanente journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ambient Artificial Intelligence Scribes: A Scoping Review With Implications for Otolaryngology.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- How Primary Care Clinicians Process Patient Death: Logistics, Emotions, and Opportunities for Structural Support.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- Physician Burnout: Evidence-Based Roadmaps to Prioritizing and Supporting Personal Wellbeing.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2024Review
- Burnout in Academic Physicians.The Permanente journal · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After reviewing a substantial amount of published data on academic physician burnout, we were left pondering the question, "Are we on the right track with combating burnout?" This point-counterpoint manuscript details two opposing viewpoints: 1) the current approach to fighting burnout is working, and 2) resources should be diverted and focus placed on other areas because current interventions are failing physicians. In addressing these points, we discuss four poignant questions that we discovered researching this multifaceted issue: 1) Why do current burnout interventions have limited effects on prevalence over time? 2) Who benefits from the current health care structure (is burnout a profitable and desirable consequence of our work environment)? 3) What organizational conceptual frameworks are most beneficial to improve burnout? 4) How do we take responsibility and seize the ground for our own well-being? Though these differing viewpoints provoked an engaging and lively conversation among our writing team, we all agree on one point. Burnout is an immense problem that affects physicians, patients, and society; therefore, it demands our attention and resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.