The randomized trial providing analyzable burnout data showed no statistically significant improvement in any burnout subscale¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The RCT included in the burnout meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences for all three Maslach Burnout Inventory subscales. → Venegas Carolina Lavin 2019
Evidence¶
Venegas Carolina Lavin 2019¶
Venegas Carolina Lavin, Nkangu Miriam N., Duffy Melissa C., Fergusson Dean A., Spilg Edward G. (2019). Interventions to improve resilience in physicians who have completed training: A systematic review. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210512
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Within the review's burnout forest plot (Fig 2), the single RCT contributing data showed no statistically significant differences on emotional exhaustion, depersonalization or personal accomplishment; no effect size printed for this contrast.
"The RCT showed no statistically significant differences for all three burnout subscales."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Observational studies showed statistically significant improvement in all burnout subscales, with pooled emotional-exhaustion SMD of -0.67 — related
- There is weak evidence to support one resilience intervention over another for physicians who have completed training — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.