CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 626Stress and Burnout ResearchPsychometric Methodologies and TestingOccupational Health and Burnout

Internal construct validity of the Shirom-Melamed Burnout questionnaire (SMBQ)

Open access
Lundgren-Nilsson, Åsa, Jonsdottir, Ingibjörg H, Pallant, Julie, Ahlborg, Gunnar·2012·BMC Public Health
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1PMC PMC3307433
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Burnout is a mental condition defined as a result of continuous and long-term stress exposure, particularly related to psychosocial factors at work. This paper seeks to examine the psychometric properties of the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Questionnaire (SMBQ) for validation of use in a clinical setting. METHODS: Data from both a clinical (319) and general population (319) samples of health care and social insurance workers were included in the study. Data were analysed using both classical and modern test theory approaches, including Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis. RESULTS: Of the 638 people recruited into the study 416 (65%) persons were working full or part time. Data from the SMBQ failed a CFA, and initially failed to satisfy Rasch model expectations. After the removal of 4 of the original items measuring tension, and accommodating local dependency in the data, model expectations were met. As such, the total score from the revised scale is a sufficient statistic for ascertaining burnout and an interval scale transformation is available. The scale as a whole was perfectly targeted to the joint sample. A cut point of 4.4 for severe burnout was chosen at the intersection of the distributions of the clinical and general population. CONCLUSION: A revised 18 item version of the SMBQ satisfies modern measurement standards. Using its cut point it offers the opportunity to identify potential clinical cases of burnout.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • SMBQ's psychometric characteristics and factorial validity have been supported.

    “SMBQ’s psychometric characteristics and factorial validity have been supported [30, 33]”

    From Psychological inflexibility explains distress in parents whose children have chronic conditions (2018) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results section supports the psychometric properties of a revised 18-item SMBQ, reporting reliability and invariance across the general-population and clinical samples. But its confirmatory factor analyses did not support either tested structure of the original 22-item questionnaire; exploratory analysis only partially supported the four-factor structure. The unqualified claim of supported factorial validity therefore overstates the findings. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The cut-off scores for burnout on the SMBQ are 2.75-3.74 indicating low burnout, 3.75-4.46 indicating high burnout, and ≥4.47 indicating pathological level of burnout.

    “The cut-off scores for burnout on the SMBQ are 2.75–3.74 indicating low burnout, 3,75–4,46 indicating high burnout and ≥ 4.47 indicating pathological level of burnout.”

    From Psychological inflexibility explains distress in parents whose children have chronic conditions (2018) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results (Internal construct and factorial validity; page not provided) establish an SMBQ cut point for severe burnout, so the source supports the general idea of a severity threshold. It gives that cut point as 4.4, not ≥4.47, and does not provide the claimed low- and high-burnout ranges or label a range 'pathological.' (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The measures were translated and back translated for previous studies, except the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) which was translated for this study by a group of researchers with long experience in acceptance-, mindfulness-, and value-based interventions.

    “The measures have been translated and back translated for previous studies [33, 36–38], except the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) that was translated for this study by a group of researchers with long experience in acceptance-, mindfulness-, and value-based interventions.”

    From Psychological inflexibility explains distress in parents whose children have chronic conditions (2018) · cites this paper as [33]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lundgren-Nilsson, Å., Jonsdottir, I. H., Pallant, J., & Ahlborg, G.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
ORCID
Pallant, Julie
Venue
BMC Public Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-01-03
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1471-2458-12-1
PMC
PMC3307433
OpenAlex
W2148425918
Cited by
626
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 81 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 3
FWCI
32.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Gothenburg University Publications Electronic Archive (Gothenburg University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
Keywords
burnout, psychometric validation, Rasch analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, scale revision, healthcare workers, occupational stress
MeSH terms
Adult, Burnout, Professional, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress, Psychological, Sweden

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