ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Burnout Across Healthcare, Educational, and Professional Populations: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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.
- Heterogeneity in psychological wellbeing within the university community: a latent profile analysis of wellbeing profiles and associated factors.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Burnout, defined by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment, is increasingly recognized as a significant threat to staff wellbeing, organizational performance, and patient safety in healthcare and related sectors. Although research on burnout has grown rapidly, the evidence base remains fragmented, limiting understanding of cross-population patterns, measurement approaches, and the effectiveness of interventions. Objective: This scoping review systematically maps and synthesizes the existing literature on burnout among healthcare workers, students, teachers, night shift workers, and other professional populations, with particular emphasis on its implications for staff well-being and quality of care. Methods: Following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane from inception to December 2024. Eligible studies used validated instruments to assess burnout. Data synthesis employed narrative thematic analysis and systematic literature mapping. Results: Sixty-five studies were included (healthcare workers n=29; students n=18; teachers n=9; night shift workers n=6; other populations n=3). Six key themes emerged: prevalence variations (25-72%), with healthcare workers demonstrating the highest rates (35-68%) and strongest associations with compromised patient safety; diversity of measurement tools; intervention effectiveness patterns, wherein combined individual-organizational approaches demonstrated superiority over single-component strategies (effect size d=0.67, 95% CI: 0.42-0.91 at 12-month follow-up); organizational versus individual risk factors; temporal trends including COVID-19 impacts; and implementation challenges. Methodological heterogeneity limited cross-population comparability and the standardization of interventions. Conclusion: Burnout represents a critical occupational health and patient safety concern. This scoping review highlights significant gaps in cross-population research, the need for standardized measurement approaches, and the importance of multilevel, evidence-based interventions. The findings provide essential insights for researchers, healthcare administrators, and policymakers aiming to design sustainable strategies to protect staff wellbeing and ensure safe, high-quality care.
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.