↓ Skip to main content

Workload, burnout, and medical mistakes among physicians in China: A cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BioScience Trends, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
134 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Workload, burnout, and medical mistakes among physicians in China: A cross-sectional study
Published in
BioScience Trends, January 2016
DOI 10.5582/bst.2015.01175
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jin Wen, Yongzhong Cheng, Xiuying Hu, Ping Yuan, Tianyou Hao, Yingkang Shi

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of burnout among different grade hospitals and to examine if a relation exists between burnout and medical mistakes. A multi-center cross-sectional survey was conducted. Physicians were interviewed in hospitals from 10 provinces in China. Burnout was measured using the Chinese version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey. Overall, 1,537 physicians were included in this study. Of these, 76.9% reported some burnout symptoms or serious burnout symptoms and 54.8% reported committing medical mistakes during the last year. 39.6%, 50.0%, and 59.5% of the respondents in primary, secondary, and tertiary hospitals respectively reported having made mistakes over the course of the previous year. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that being female was protective against medical mistakes (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.89), whereas physician-reported 60 or more work hours per week (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.22-2.22), and physicians who reported serious burnout (OR = 2.28, 95% CI: 1.63-3.17) were independently associated with higher incidence of medical mistakes. In conclusion, Chinese physicians reported high workloads, high rates of burnout and high medical mistakes. Physicians in tertiary hospitals were especially overworked and suffered the most serious burnout. Longer work hours per week, and burnout were the independent risk factors for medical mistakes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Student > Master 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Researcher 11 8%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 47 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 27%
Psychology 14 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 54 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from BioScience Trends
#211
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,044
of 399,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioScience Trends
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.