Burnout questionnaires had more evidence on reliability than validity
A review of pandemic research found uneven reporting of how well burnout scales measured healthcare workers' experiences.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
This review found that burnout questionnaires used during the pandemic were better documented for reliability than for validity. Evidence that questionnaire items fit together was more common than evidence supporting what the resulting scores measure. That distinction matters when interpreting burnout research or comparing findings produced by different scales.
This abstract-based summary concerns reported measurement properties. The abstract does not provide enough detail to rank individual questionnaires or determine their accuracy for identifying burnout.
What researchers found
Questionnaires with any reported validity evidence
A descriptive count across burnout scales used during the pandemic; there was no treatment comparator. This counts questionnaires, not affected workers.
Different tools, different assessments
The review catalogued questionnaires used with healthcare workers and examined their measurement properties. The instruments differed in length, subscales, answer options, languages and development settings, so they did not represent a uniform assessment approach.
Consistency and interpretation
Internal consistency concerns how questionnaire items fit together. Validity evidence addresses the interpretation of scores; most reported validity work here concerned scale structure. Limited reporting does not by itself establish that a questionnaire is invalid.
The original publication
Burnout scales used in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and their psychometric properties: a systematic review.
Efremova MI, Cho Y, Miglietta E et al.
Front Public Health · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 41584182
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.