↓ Skip to main content

Sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with the development of different burnout types: the cross-sectional University of Zaragoza study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Sociodemographic and occupational risk factors associated with the development of different burnout types: the cross-sectional University of Zaragoza study
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, March 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-244x-11-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jesús Montero-Marín, Javier García-Campayo, Marta Fajó-Pascual, José Miguel Carrasco, Santiago Gascón, Margarita Gili, Fermín Mayoral-Cleries

Abstract

Three different burnout types have been described: The "frenetic" type describes involved and ambitious subjects who sacrifice their health and personal lives for their jobs; the "underchallenged" type describes indifferent and bored workers who fail to find personal development in their jobs, and the "worn-out" in type describes neglectful subjects who feel they have little control over results and whose efforts go unacknowledged. The study aimed to describe the possible associations between burnout types and general sociodemographic and occupational characteristics.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 100 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 18%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 26 25%
Unknown 17 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 34%
Psychology 23 22%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 20 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 04 August 2020.
All research outputs
#795,410
of 16,730,735 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#237
of 3,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#759,544
of 15,613,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#237
of 3,686 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,730,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,686 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 15,613,071 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,686 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.