Patterns of Work-Related Burnout in Physician-Scientists Receiving Career Development Awards From the National Institutes of Health | Professional Well-being | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Templeton  K, Bernstein  CA, Sukhera  J,  et al.  Gender-based Differences in Burnout: Issues Faced by Women Physicians. Washington, DC: National Academy of Medicine; 2019:1-16, Accessed June 21, 2019.
Shanafelt  TD, Hasan  O, Dyrbye  LN,  et al.  Changes in burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance in physicians and the general US working population between 2011 and 2014.  Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(12):1600-1613. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.08.023PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Jagsi  R, Griffith  KA, Jones  RD, Stewart  A, Ubel  PA.  Factors associated with success of clinician-researchers receiving career development awards from the National Institutes of Health: a longitudinal cohort study.  Acad Med. 2017;92(10):1429-1439. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000001728PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kristensen  TS, Borritz  M, Villadsen  E, Christensen  KB.  The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: a new tool for the assessment of burnout.  Work Stress. 2005;19(3):192-207. doi:10.1080/02678370500297720Google ScholarCrossref
Klein  J, Grosse Frie  K, Blum  K, von dem Knesebeck  O.  Burnout and perceived quality of care among German clinicians in surgery.  Int J Qual Health Care. 2010;22(6):525-530. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzq056PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018.  Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2018.
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Research Letter
    Physician Work Environment and Well-Being
    October 14, 2019

    Patterns of Work-Related Burnout in Physician-Scientists Receiving Career Development Awards From the National Institutes of Health

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
    • 2Center for Cancer Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
    • 3Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
    • 4Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
    • 5Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
    JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(1):150-153. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.4317

    Physician burnout, a pathological syndrome characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a reduced sense of personal accomplishment in response to prolonged occupational stress, is a national priority.1,2 Burnout appears to be more common in certain physician subgroups, including women.1 We extend prior research by reporting on the patterns of work-related burnout in physician-scientists.

    As detailed elsewhere,3 the University of Michigan institutional review board provided approval and a waiver of documentation of consent. Between August 2010 and February 2011, we surveyed 1708 individuals who received new K08 and K23 awards from the National Institutes of Health during 2006 to 2009. In 2014, we conducted a follow-up survey that was administered exclusively to respondents to the initial questionnaire; 1066 (62.0% of the originally targeted population) responded to both surveys.3