ArticleScandinavian journal of work, environment & health2026
Clinical and screening utility of the Burnout Assessment Tool: A comparative evaluation of BAT23, BAT12 and BAT4 in Sweden.
Article in Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesClinical burnout may have serious personal and societal impacts, such as reduced productivity, prolonged sick leave and long rehabilitation. Regular screening using clinically relevant cut-offs to identify individuals at risk is essential for effective prevention. This study aimed to: (i) establish Swedish clinical cut-off scores for the Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) versions (ie., BAT23, BAT12, BAT4); (ii) assess the BAT4's ability to classify burnout severity; and (iii) calculate burnout complaints in the Swedish workforce.
methodsA national representative sample of the Swedish working population (N=1603) and a burned-out group (N=159) diagnosed with exhaustion disorder (ED) were surveyed using BAT23, BAT12, and BAT4. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses determined diagnostic accuracy and cut-offs for mild (orange) and severe (red) burnout complaints. A sensitivity analysis using clinician-confirmed ED patients (N=25) validated findings.
resultsBAT23 showed the highest accuracy in differentiating between mild and severe complaints. Among the subscales, exhaustion performed best. BAT12 showed good accuracy at the orange and slightly reduced sensitivity at the red cut-off. BAT4, while showing excellent sensitivity (0.93) at the orange cut-off, had poor sensitivity (0.47) at the red cut-off, limiting its clinical utility. Prevalence estimates using Swedish cut-offs showed approximately 13% of the workforce had severe burnout complaints (BAT23 and BAT12).
conclusionsBAT23 is recommended for comprehensive assessments; BAT12 is useful for workplace screening where a shorter questionnaire is required and BAT4 for broad organizational screening using only the orange cut-off. Findings support the structured application of BAT across varying settings and a deeper understanding of the BAT4.
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.