TY - JOUR
T1 - Burnout among general practitioners, a systematic quantitative review of the literature on determinants of burnout and their ecological value
AU - Verhoef, Nicolaas Cornelis
AU - Blomme, Robert Jan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 Verhoef and Blomme.
PY - 2022/12/15
Y1 - 2022/12/15
N2 - Burnout is a major social and economic problem, specifically among general practitioners (GPs). The amount of literature on generic determinants of burnout is impressive. However, the size of the library on occupation-specific determinants of burnout among GPs are minimal. With the present study, we aim to gain insight into the existing academic literature on generic and occupation-specific determinants of burnout among GPs. Moreover, we aim to contribute to the ecological validity of this study by emphasizing occupation-specific determinants. We conducted a systematic quantitative literature review in which we followed the PRISMA statement and performed quality assessments according to the AXIS, CASP, MMAT, and 3-MIN procedures. Furthermore, we assessed frequency effect sizes (FES) and intensity effect sizes (IES). By performing Fisher’s exact tests, we investigated whether the quality of the studies influenced the outcomes. An extensive literature search revealed 60 eligible studies among which 28 strong studies, 29 moderate studies, and 3 weak studies were identified. Analyzing those studies delivered 75 determinants of burnout, of which 33 were occupation-specific for GPs. According to the average FES, occupation-specific determinants play a significant role in acquiring burnout compared to the generic determinants. The results of the Fisher exact tests provided evidence that the quality of the 60 studies did not affect the outcomes. We conclude that it is surprising that a profession with such an important social position and such a high risk of burnout has been so little researched.
AB - Burnout is a major social and economic problem, specifically among general practitioners (GPs). The amount of literature on generic determinants of burnout is impressive. However, the size of the library on occupation-specific determinants of burnout among GPs are minimal. With the present study, we aim to gain insight into the existing academic literature on generic and occupation-specific determinants of burnout among GPs. Moreover, we aim to contribute to the ecological validity of this study by emphasizing occupation-specific determinants. We conducted a systematic quantitative literature review in which we followed the PRISMA statement and performed quality assessments according to the AXIS, CASP, MMAT, and 3-MIN procedures. Furthermore, we assessed frequency effect sizes (FES) and intensity effect sizes (IES). By performing Fisher’s exact tests, we investigated whether the quality of the studies influenced the outcomes. An extensive literature search revealed 60 eligible studies among which 28 strong studies, 29 moderate studies, and 3 weak studies were identified. Analyzing those studies delivered 75 determinants of burnout, of which 33 were occupation-specific for GPs. According to the average FES, occupation-specific determinants play a significant role in acquiring burnout compared to the generic determinants. The results of the Fisher exact tests provided evidence that the quality of the 60 studies did not affect the outcomes. We conclude that it is surprising that a profession with such an important social position and such a high risk of burnout has been so little researched.
KW - ecological validity
KW - general practitioners
KW - generic determinants
KW - occupation-specific determinants
KW - systematic quantitative literature review
U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1064889
DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1064889
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85145220707
SN - 1664-1078
VL - 13
JO - Frontiers in Psychology
JF - Frontiers in Psychology
M1 - 1064889
ER -