SynthesisArhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju2022
Psychometric validity of the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure and the Burnout Assessment Tool: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Chronic stress in relation to clinical burnout: an integrative scoping review of definitions and measurement approaches.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Can the different versions of the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure be used to measure burnout among healthcare professionals? A systematic review of psychometric properties.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Pooled it
- Measurement of compassion fatigue in animal health care professionals: a systematic review of available instruments and their content validity.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Pooled it
- Psychosocial work environment and health among ambulance clinicians in northern Sweden.Discover mental health · 2026Article
- Clinical and screening utility of the Burnout Assessment Tool: A comparative evaluation of BAT23, BAT12 and BAT4 in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Workplace Mental Health Programs in Reducing Occupational Burnout: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Dimensionality, Sensitivity and Specificity of Different Versions of the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Questionnaire/Measure in Clinical and Non-Clinical Populations.Stress and health : journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress · 2025Article
- Development of a multicomponent survey of experiences of tragedy-based and fear-based trauma in COVID-19 healthcare professionals.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Article
- Validation of the burnout assessment tool-core symptoms in Spanish veterinarians, sex invariance, and cutoff points.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the absence of internationally recognised standardised criteria, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to measure occupational burnout. The aim of this study was to extend our 2021 review of the psychometric validity of five PROMs to the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure (SMBM) and the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT). To do that we ran a systematic literature search in the MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase databases following our previous methodological framework and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). We assessed the level of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guideline. We identified 694 publications on SMBM and 421 on BAT, but the final review includes eight papers on SMBM and three on BAT. Of the seven psychometric properties assessed for SMBM, content, structural, and criterion validity were rated as insufficient, whereas the quality of evidence for construct and internal consistency was high and moderate, respectively. Of the nine psychometric properties assessed for BAT, content, structural, criterion, and construct validity was moderate and internal consistency was high. One limitation of this study is that we did not assess cross-cultural validity, because the number of studies reviewed is too small and content validity can only be assessed based on the original PROM version rather than translation. To conclude, BAT is superior to SMBM in terms of psychometric validity, but the quality of evidence for some properties is low or very low, suggesting a need for additional validation studies.
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.