Cited by 244Stress and Burnout ResearchOccupational Health and BurnoutHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Job burnout in mental health providers: A meta-analysis of 35 years of intervention research

Open access

Abstract

Burnout is prevalent among mental health providers and is associated with significant employee, consumer, and organizational costs. Over the past 35 years, numerous intervention studies have been conducted but have yet to be reviewed and synthesized using a quantitative approach. To fill this gap, we performed a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of burnout interventions for mental health workers. We completed a systematic literature search of burnout intervention studies that spanned more than 3 decades (1980 to 2015). Each eligible study was independently coded by 2 researchers, and data were analyzed using a random-effects model with effect sizes based on the Hedges' g statistic. We computed an overall intervention effect size and performed moderator analyses. Twenty-seven unique samples were included in the meta-analysis, representing 1,894 mental health workers. Interventions had a small but positive effect on provider burnout (Hedges' g = .13, p = .006). Moderator analyses suggested that person-directed interventions were more effective than organization-directed interventions at reducing emotional exhaustion (Qbetween = 6.70, p = .010) and that job training/education was the most effective organizational intervention subtype (Qbetween = 12.50, p < .001). Lower baseline burnout levels were associated with smaller intervention effects and accounted for a significant proportion of effect size variability. The field has made limited progress in ameliorating mental health provider burnout. Based on our findings, we suggest that researchers implement a wider breadth of interventions that are tailored to address unique organizational and staff needs and that incorporate longer follow-up periods. (PsycINFO Database Record

Overview

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 · 10.1037/ocp0000047

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 73 references

1 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to metaanalysis. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
  2. Carson, J., Butterworth, T., & Burnard, P. (1998). Clinicial supervision, stress management and social support. In T. Butterworth, J. Faugier, & P. Burnard (Eds.), Clinicial supervision and mentorship in nursing (pp. 49-65). Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.
  3. Rovai, A. P., Baker, J. D., & Ponton, M. K. (2014). Quantitative research. Social science research design and statistics: A practitioner's guide to research methods and IBM SPSS analysis (2nd ed., pp. 33-83). Chesapeake, VA: Watertree Press LLC.
  4. Schaufeli, W. B., & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study & practice. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 244

Metadata

Authors
Dreison, K. C., Luther, L., Bonfils, K. A., Sliter, M. T., McGrew, J. H., & Salyers, M. P.
Affiliations
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US)
Venue
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology
Published
2018-01
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
18-30
ISSN
  • 1076-8998 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1307
OpenAlex
W2521324286
Cited by
244
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 8
FWCI
2.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Purdue University Indianapolis (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Burnout
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
burnout, mental health professionals, burnout intervention, emotional exhaustion, job training, intervention effectiveness, occupational stress
MeSH terms
Occupational Stress, Burnout, Professional, Fatigue, Health Personnel, Humans, Mental Health, Patient Education as Topic, Self Efficacy

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