Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40997322›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Assessing Work-Related Stressors in Online Counseling: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Development Study.

Wiebke Schlenger, Marlies Joellenbeck, Elke Ochsmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

3 authors.

Wiebke SchlengerInstitute of Occupational Health, Prevention and Health Management, Faculty of Medicine, Lübeck University, Luebeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0372-8975
Marlies JoellenbeckInstitute of Occupational Health, Prevention and Health Management, Faculty of Medicine, Lübeck University, Luebeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3039-7147
Elke OchsmannInstitute of Occupational Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Saarland University, Kirrberger Str. 100, Homburg/Saar, 66424, Germany, 49 68130275030.ORCID 0000-0002-0340-1251

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The rapid digitalization of health and social services, particularly accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, has led to a widespread adoption of online counseling. While offering flexibility and improved access for clients, online counseling presents new challenges for counselors, including technical issues, difficulties in building therapeutic relationships, and changes in work organization. Despite growing reliance on digital counseling platforms, there is a lack of validated tools to assess specific occupational stressors associated with online counseling. Objective: This study aimed to develop and evaluate the "QueStrOn" (Questionnaire to Assess Stressors in Online Counseling), an instrument designed to identify stressors and resources specific to online counseling and to explore its ability to predict perceived stress levels in counselors. Methods: Item development was guided by the Job Demands-Resources model, qualitative interviews with 22 counselors, expert input, and a literature review. A preliminary version of the questionnaire was pretested and then distributed via email and social media to counselors offering both online and face-to-face services. A total of 219 counselors completed the survey, and after applying inclusion criteria, 174 responses were analyzed. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted using principal axis factoring and varimax rotation. Internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach alpha (α). A linear regression model was used to initially test the predictive power of the identified factors with perceived digital stress as the dependent variable. Results: The exploratory factor analysis resulted in a four-factor solution with 16 items, capturing (1) Online Work Organization, (2) Online Framework, (3) Online Work Content, and (4) Online Communication. The overall instrument demonstrated high internal consistency (α=0.870), with acceptable values for factors (1), (3), and (4) (α=0.754, 0.745, and 0.826, respectively), although the factor "Online Framework" showed limited reliability (α=0.502). The regression model, adjusted for age and gender, significantly predicted perceived stress in online counseling (F5=13.335, P<.001), explaining 27.1% of the variance. Online Work Organization, Online Communication, and Online Framework were associated with lower perceived stress when rated positively, whereas Online Work Content showed an inverse relationship, potentially reflecting emotional distancing. Conclusions: The QueStrOn instrument provides a valid first step toward systematically assessing occupational stressors in online counseling. Its 4-factor structure aligns with theoretical and empirical findings and offers practical utility for workplace risk assessments. Incorporating these dimensions into routine evaluations may support counselor well-being and inform digital health policy. Further validation and longitudinal studies are recommended to expand its applicability and explore associations with broader health outcomes.

Indexed as

CounselingCounselorsOccupational StressAdultCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnairesdigital transformationemployee healthonline counselingquestionnairetherapeutic relationshipwork organizationworkplace risk assessments

Identifiers

PMID40997322
PMCPMC12466792

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.