Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 8;5(1):343.
doi: 10.1038/s43856-025-01069-1.

Assessment of clinician well-being and the factors that influence it using validated questionnaires: a systematic review

Claudie Audet  1 , Andréanne Bernier  1 , Marimée Godbout-Parent  1 , Hermine Lore Nguena Nguefack  1 , Liz Ferland  1 , Paula L Bush  2 , Marie-Dominique Poirier  3 , Sonia Lussier  3 , Tracie A Barnett  2 , Sylvie D Lambert  4   5 , Anaïs Lacasse  6
Affiliations

Assessment of clinician well-being and the factors that influence it using validated questionnaires: a systematic review

Claudie Audet et al. Commun Med (Lond). .

Abstract

Background: Measuring clinician experiences of care and well-being (e.g. job satisfaction, fulfillment) offers insights into the practice environment's impact, aiding workforce retention, patient safety, and care quality. However, valid measurement instruments are essential. This systematic review identified validated self-reported questionnaires designed to assess clinician well-being and its influencing factors.

Methods: Psychometric studies in English or French on measurement instruments addressing factors that influence clinician well-being, as proposed by the National Academy of Medicine, were included. Studies published between 2013 and 2023 were retrieved in December 2023 by searching these databases: CINAHL, Embase, HaPI, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Mental Measurements Yearbook, and APA PsycTests. Study selection was completed by two independent reviewers. Results were summarized narratively, in tables, and figures. Quality of psychometric studies was assessed by the number of measurement properties addressed. The review protocol was registered with INPLASY® (202410047).

Results: Out of 10,441 records identified, 136 studies are included. The majority come from the USA (27.2%), Spain (11.0%), Canada (5.9%), or Australia (5.9%). Most focus on instruments for clinicians, regardless of their specialty (55.9%). Among profession-specific instruments (44.1%), nurses and physicians are mainly targeted. The most common domains are: (1) 'Learning/practice environment' (38.2%), (2) 'Healthcare responsibilities' (21.3%), and (3) 'Organizational factors' (19.1%). The most frequently addressed measurement properties are: (1) Internal consistency (88.2%), (2) Structural validity (75.7%), and (3) Content validity (68.4%).

Conclusions: Many tools for measuring clinician well-being exist, but few are fully validated. The results of this review provide a foundation to support ongoing psychometric evaluation and cross-cultural adaptation.

Plain language summary

Society and healthcare services are evolving rapidly, requiring clinicians to constantly adapt and placing them under continuous pressure. It is essential to investigate the factors influencing their well-being at work to maintain safe and high-quality patient care. To achieve this, valid tools are needed to measure clinician well-being. We conducted a literature review to identify tools currently available worldwide. Our results show that most of these tools are in English and originate from the United States. Moreover, a large proportion of tools focus on physicians and nurses. Given that healthcare organization varies between countries, it is important to have valid tools adapted to each country’s cultural context and language. We therefore identify a need for cross-cultural adaptation of these tools into multiple languages and care settings. Additionally, there should be profession-specific tools for various healthcare providers (e.g., pharmacists, dentists, physiotherapists), not only for physicians and nurses. Improvements to these tools will enable better assessment of health worker wellbeing, which will have a positive impact on them and the patients they treat.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Clinician-reported experience measures (CREMs), patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs).
Adapted with permission from Unité de soutien SSA Québec.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Study selection flow diagram.
* Since the APA PsycTests database search results are operationalized in the form of instrument short reviews rather than individual peer-reviewed journal articles, and since the results of this database are not directly exportable into EndNote®/Rayyan®, records management was performed manually in parallel and is presented as an add-on within the systematic review flow diagram. The database led to the retrieval of 149 instrument records, among which 55 were kept based on the abstracts (by two independent authors who reached consensus on any conflicts). Those 55 instruments were covered in 51 articles, 43 of which were not already retrieved in the main electronic search.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Language of measurement instruments across included studies.
Non-mutually exclusive categories, n = 136.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Clinicians targeted in included studies.
Non-mutually exclusive categories, n = 60.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5. Groups of factors covered in included studies.
Non-mutually exclusive categories, n = 136.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Patient Engagement Action Team. Engaging Patients in Patient Safety – A Canadian Guide - Glossary of Terms, <https://www.healthcareexcellence.ca/en/resources/engaging-patients-in-pa...> (2019).
    1. Søvold, L. E. et al. Prioritizing the mental health and well-being of healthcare workers: An urgent global public health priority. Front. Public Health910.3389/fpubh.2021.679397 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Figueroa, C. A., Harrison, R., Chauhan, A. & Meyer, L. Priorities and challenges for health leadership and workforce management globally: A rapid review. BMC Health Serv. Res19, 239 (2019). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fteropoulli, T. et al. Beyond the physical risk: Psychosocial impact and coping in healthcare professionals during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Journal of clinical nursing10.1111/jocn.15938 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ehrlich, H., McKenney, M. & Elkbuli, A. Protecting our healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am. J. Emerg. Med38, 1527–1528 (2020). - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources