ArticleSingapore medical journal2025
Burnout among COVID-19 hospital-based contact tracers in Singapore: results of a mixed-method, cross-sectional multicentre study.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDuring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, contact tracers were under immense pressure to deliver effective and timely contact tracing, raising concerns of higher susceptibility to burnout. Our study aimed to determine burnout prevalence among hospital-based contact tracers and associated risk factors, so that interventions to reduce burnout risk could be formulated.
methodsOne hundred and ninety-six active contact tracers across three hospitals within a healthcare cluster were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. To identify burntout, data such as demographics, work-related variables and contact tracing-related variables were collected using the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Associated factors were identified using multivariate statistics. Open-ended questions were included to understand the challenges and potential improvements through qualitative analysis.
resultsA total of 126 participants completed the survey, giving a completion rate of 64%, and almost half of these participants (42.9%) reported burnout. Protective factors included being on work-from-home arrangements (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08-0.56), perception of being well supported by their institution (adjusted OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.80) and being married (adjusted OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12-0.64). Risk factors included having an administrative role pre-COVID-19 (adjusted OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.33-9.83). Work-related burnout was related to being activated for more than 1 day in the preceding week (unadjusted OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.33-7.94) and multiple activations in a day (unadjusted OR 3.54, 95% CI 1.44-4.41). Biggest challenges identified by participants were language barrier (62.7%), followed by workflow-related issues (42.1%).
conclusionOur study demonstrated burnout and other challenges faced by a team of mostly hospital-based administrative staff redeployed on a part-time basis to ensure timely contact tracing. To mitigate burnout, we recommend choosing staff on work-from-home arrangements and ensuring adequate manpower and rostering arrangements.
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.