Figure 1
PROM description, initial validation, and validity of statistical analysis
| Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure | Burnout Assessment Tool | |
|---|---|---|
| Authors | Shirom and Melamed | Schaufeli, Desart, and De Witte |
| Aim | Screening for employees at risk of burnout | Screening for employees at risk of burnout |
| Year of publication | 2003 | 2020 |
| Country | Israel | Belgium |
| Language of original version | Hebrew and English | Flemish Dutch and English |
| Population | Working population | Working population |
| Dimensions (Number of items) | Physical fatigue (6) | Exhaustion (8) |
| Cognitive weariness (5) | Mental distance (5) | |
| Emotional exhaustion (3) | Cognitive impairment (5) | |
| Emotional impairment (5) | ||
| Number of analysed articles | 7 | 3 |
| Number of psychometric prosperities assessed by these articles | 6/11 | 9/11 |
| Face validity | - | 1 |
| Content validity | - | 1 |
| Predictive validity | 5 | - |
| Concurrent validity | - | - |
| Convergent validity | 1 | 1 |
| Discriminant validity | 2 | 1 |
| Exploratory factorial validity | - | 2 |
| Confirmatory factorial validity | 1 | 2 |
| Stability | 4 | 1 |
| Homogeneity | 7 | 3 |
| Sensitivity | - | 1 |
| Comparison between authors' and reviewers' interpretation | ||
| Complete agreement | 6/7 | 1/3 |
| Partial agreement | 1/7 | 2/3 |
| Disagreement | 0/7 | 0/3 |
Comparison of the two burnout PROMs against the COSMIN guidelines
| Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure | Burnout Assessment Tool | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall rating | Quality of evidence | Overall rating | Quality of evidence | |
| Content validity | − | Very low | + | Moderate |
| Relevance | − | Very low | + | Moderate |
| Comprehensiveness | − | Very low | + | Moderate |
| Comprehensibility | − | Very low | + | Moderate/Low |
| Structural validity | − | Very low | + | Moderate |
| Internal consistency | + | Moderate | + | High |
| Reliability | + | Low | + | Low |
| Measurement error | ? | Very low | − | Low |
| Criterion validity | − | Very low | + | Moderate |
| Construct validity | + | High | + | Moderate |
| Responsiveness | ? | Very low | ? | Very low |