Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 260

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Burnout, engagement and resident physicians' self-reported errors

Open access
Prins, J. T., van der Heijden, F. M.M.A., Hoekstra-Weebers, J. E.H.M., Bakker, A. B., van de Wiel, H. B.M., Jacobs, B., Gazendam-Donofrio, S. M.·2009·Psychology, Health & Medicine

Abstract

Burnout is a work-related syndrome that may negatively affect more than just the resident physician. On the other hand, engagement has been shown to protect employees; it may also positively affect the patient care that the residents provide. Little is known about the relationship between residents' self-reported errors and burnout and engagement. In our national study that included all residents and physicians in The Netherlands, 2115 questionnaires were returned (response rate 41.1%). The residents reported on burnout (Maslach Burnout Inventory-Health and Social Services), engagement (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale) and self-assessed patient care practices (six items, two factors: errors in action/judgment, errors due to lack of time). Ninety-four percent of the residents reported making one or more mistake without negative consequences for the patient during their training. Seventy-one percent reported performing procedures for which they did not feel properly trained. More than half (56%) of the residents stated they had made a mistake with a negative consequence. Seventy-six percent felt they had fallen short in the quality of care they provided on at least one occasion. Men reported more errors in action/judgment than women. Significant effects of specialty and clinical setting were found on both types of errors. Residents with burnout reported significantly more errors (p < 0.001). Highly engaged residents reported fewer errors (p ≤ 0.01). Overall residents disclosed that in their perception they regularly make errors throughout their residency. Steps should be taken to help residents minimize the number of perceived errors made. Therefore, it is important to prevent residents from developing burnout and to keep residents engaged in their work.

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 · 10.1080/13548500903311554

Cites

13 of 13 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

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

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 260

Metadata

Authors
Prins, J. T., van der Heijden, F. M. M. A., Hoekstra-Weebers, J. E. H. M., Bakker, A. B., van de Wiel, H. B. M., Jacobs, B., & Gazendam-Donofrio, S. M.
Venue
Psychology, Health & Medicine
Published
2009-12
Volume
14
Issue
6
Pages
654-666
ISSN
  • 1354-8506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3966
OpenAlex
W2166108043
Cited by
260
References
13
FWCI
7.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Burnout, engagement and resident physicians' self-reported errors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13548500903311554
The paper
Prins, J. T., van der Heijden, F. M. M. A., Hoekstra-Weebers, J. E. H. M., Bakker, A. B., van de Wiel, H. B. M., Jacobs, B., & Gazendam-Donofrio, S. M. (2009). Burnout, engagement and resident physicians' self-reported errors. Psychology, Health & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548500903311554

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.