Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38821879›Full record

ArticleEvaluation & the health professions2025

Casting a Wider Net: On the Utilitarian Nature of Burnout Assessment in the Workplace.

Leon T De Beer, Wilmar B Schaufeli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evaluation & the health professions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Leon T De BeerDepartment of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6900-2192
Wilmar B SchaufeliDepartment of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some consider the burnout label to be controversial, even calling for the abandonment of the term in its entirety. In this communication, we argue for the pragmatic utility of the burnout paradigm from a utilitarian perspective, which advocates the greatest good for the most significant number of employees in organisations. We first distinguish between mild work-related burnout complaints and more severe burnout that can be identified in some contexts. We address the classification of burnout as an 'occupational phenomenon' by the World Health Organization and its ambiguous status in the ICD-11, highlighting the challenge of universally diagnosing burnout as a condition. We argue that a purely clinical approach might be too reactive as it normally only identifies employees with a diagnosable condition. We posit that early detection of burnout through valid assessment can identify struggling employees who do not yet have a diagnosable condition. This proactive approach can help prevent escalation into mental health crises and is more sensible for organisations in terms of effectiveness and employee retention.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalWorkplaceHumansInternational Classification of Diseasesburned outburnoutdepressionutilitarianwork stress

Identifiers

PMID38821879
PMCPMC11979304

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.