Cited by 187Stress and Burnout ResearchOccupational Health and BurnoutHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Psychometric properties of burnout measures: a systematic review

Open access
Shoman, Y., Marca, S. C., Bianchi, R., Godderis, L., van der Molen, H. F., Guseva Canu, I.·2021·Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences

Abstract

Aims: Occupational Burnout (OB) is currently measured through several Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and some of them have become widely used in occupational health research and practice. We, therefore, aimed to review and grade the psychometric validity of the five OB PROMs considered as valid for OB measure in mental health professionals (the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the Pines' Burnout Measure (BM), the Psychologist Burnout Inventory (PBI), the OLdenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI)). Methods: We conducted systematic literature searches in MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE databases. We reviewed studies published between January 1980 and September 2018 following a methodological framework, in which each step of PROM validation, the reference method, analytical technics and result interpretation criteria were assessed. Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments we evaluated the risk of bias in studies assessing content and criterion validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypotheses testing and responsiveness of each PROM. Finally, we assessed the level of evidence for the validity of each PROM using the GRADE approach. Results: We identified 6541 studies, 19 of which were included for review. Fifteen studies dealt with MBI whereas BM, PBI, OLBI and CBI were each examined in only one study. OLBI had the most complete validation, followed by CBI, MBI, BM and PBI, respectively. When examining the result interpretation correctness, the strongest disagreement was observed for MBI (27% of results), BM (25%) and CBI (17%). There was no disagreement regarding PBI and OLBI. For OLBI and CBI, the quality of evidence for sufficient content validity, the crucial psychometric property, was moderate; for MBI, BM and PBI, it was very low. Conclusion: To be validly and reliably used in medical research and practice, PROM should exhibit robust psychometric properties. Among the five PROMs reviewed, CBI and, to a lesser extent, OLBI meet this prerequisite. The cross-cultural validity of these PROMs was beyond the scope of our work and should be addressed in the future. Moreover, the development of a diagnostic standard for OB would be helpful to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the PROMs and further reexamine their validity. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42019124621).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s2045796020001134

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The COSMIN tool has been used in psychological and educational research.

    “While the COSMIN tool was originally devised for the medical field, it has since been used in both psychological66,67 and educational research68.”

    From A systematic review of AI literacy scales (2024) · cites this paper as [66]

  • Compassion fatigue was first used in healthcare in 1992 by a nurse educator, Joinson, to explain the 'loss of the ability to nurture' in emergency nurses.

    “Compassion fatigue was first used in healthcare in 1992 by a nurse educator, Joinson, to explain the 'loss of the ability to nurture' in emergency nurses who experienced tiredness, depression, anger, and detachment due to intense workloads and complex patient needs [94,166].”

    From Measuring the Mental Health of Content Reviewers, a Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [166]

    The Introduction discusses the history of occupational burnout, and the Results describe burnout measures, but neither addresses the origin of the term “compassion fatigue.” Searches for Joinson, compassion fatigue, and the quoted description of emergency nurses found no relevant passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Clinical psychologists agree that measures of compassion fatigue are best used for screening rather than direct diagnosis.

    “Clinical psychologists agree that measures of compassion fatigue are best used for screening rather than direct diagnosis [24,166,172].”

    From Measuring the Mental Health of Content Reviewers, a Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [166]

    The Methods and analysis (Eligibility criteria; page unavailable) exclude ProQOL from this review of occupational-burnout measures. The Discussion (Suggestions for future research in the field; page unavailable) calls for a diagnostic standard for occupational burnout, but neither passage addresses whether compassion-fatigue measures should be used for screening rather than diagnosis or whether clinical psychologists agree on that practice. Searched for compassion fatigue, screening, and diagnosis. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Molinero Ruiz E, Basart Gomez-Quintero H and Moncada Lluis S (2013) [Validation of the Copenhagen burnout inventory to assess professional burnout in Spain]. Revista Española de Salud Pública 87, 165– 179. 23775105
  2. Pines AM and Aronson E (1988) Career Burnout. New York: Free Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shoman, Y., Marca, S. C., Bianchi, R., Godderis, L., van der Molen, H. F., & Guseva Canu, I.
Affiliations
  • Centre universitaire de médecine générale et santé publique, Lausanne (CH)
  • University of Neuchâtel (CH)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Shoman, Y.
Venue
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
Published
2021
Volume
30
Pages
e8-e8
ISSN
  • 2045-7960 (ISSN-L)
  • 2045-7979
OpenAlex
W3120788301
Cited by
187
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 11
FWCI
4.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • University of Bern
  • University of Cambridge
  • European Commission (801076, 2020 ‘, HORIZON2020)
  • Université de Lausanne
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
burnout measurement, psychometric properties, patient-reported outcome measures, Maslach Burnout Inventory, Oldenburg Burnout Inventory, Copenhagen Burnout Inventory, content validity, criterion validity, internal consistency, responsiveness, mental health professionals
MeSH terms
Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Burnout, Psychological, Burnout, Professional, Humans, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review