Work and Environmental Factors on Job Burnout: A Cross-Sectional Study for Sustainable Work

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

In this version, they addressed my previous comments, and now I'm saticefied.

However, in the text, there are too many extremely short paragraphs. I would suggest to merge some of them together.

And still lines 403 -406 are unnecessarily in Bold. Pls correct it.

minor editing

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have prepared one table (1- peer reviewer corrections required) in which we have included the following information:

1. the first column contains the number of comments of peer reviewer, following the sequence present in the revised paper;
2. the second column contains the Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions:
3. the third column contains the modifications made, their explanation and, above all, the number of page and lines in which these modifications have been included.

Title: WORK AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON JOB BURNOUT: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AMONG DOCTORS FOR SUSTAINABLE WORK 

Ref: sustainability-2953147

REV. TABLE NUMBER 1

I look forward to Your feedback.

Best regards

Palermo, 3.04.2024

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)

The author has made careful revisions to the abstract and introduction of the article. Some interesting points are presented in the abstract so far, thanks to the authors for their cooperation. Further minor amendments are proposed. I wish you success.

1. The number of people tested in lines 134-137 is the same as that in lines 231-234. I suggest that the contents of lines 231-234 be reflected in the method part. The results section begins directly with a description of the results.

2. The author may not have understood the purpose of the framework I presented earlier. By studying the relationship between authorization variables and emotional exhaustion, the author should be able to establish a relationship framework. In other words, a model can be built through mediating variables, moderating effects, etc. I can provide you with a diagram constructed by someone else, written in Chinese, just for reference. I hope this helps you understand that you can choose to use this type of image to enhance the presentation of your article.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have prepared one table (1- peer reviewer corrections required) in which we have included the following information:

1. the first column contains the number of comments of peer reviewer, following the sequence present in the revised paper;
2. the second column contains the Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions:
3. the third column contains the modifications made, their explanation and, above all, the number of page and lines in which these modifications have been included.

Title: WORK AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON JOB BURNOUT: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AMONG DOCTORS FOR SUSTAINABLE WORK 

Ref: sustainability-2953147

REV. TABLE NUMBER 2

I look forward to Your feedback.

Best regards

Palermo, 3.04.2024

Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

The authors addressed my previous comments and improved their manuscript.

Minor editing of the English language is required.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have prepared one table (1- peer reviewer corrections required) in which we have included the following information:

1. the first column contains the number of comments of peer reviewer, following the sequence present in the revised paper;
2. the second column contains the Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions:
3. the third column contains the modifications made, their explanation and, above all, the number of page and lines in which these modifications have been included.

Title: WORK AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON JOB BURNOUT: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AMONG DOCTORS FOR SUSTAINABLE WORK 

Ref: sustainability-2953147

REV. TABLE NUMBER 3

I look forward to Your feedback.

Best regards

Palermo, 3.04.2024

Reviewer 4 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the updated manuscript. You still need to find who are the author of the webpage you mentioned in the list of references as 7 and 8.

All the best

Author Response

See attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report (New Reviewer)

Dear authors,

your topic seems to be current in the times when shortage of healthcare personal is everywhere. Your finding are valuable, but you have to address some issues with manuscript.

Title - seem too long. I suggest to have it in this way ''Work and environmental factors on job burnout: A cross-sectional study'' way Please do not use term doctors, it's preferable physicians.

Abstract - please use structured abstract (background, aim, methods, results, conclusion. The instrument you used is Maslach Burnout Inventory, not Maslach et al. 

Introduction - Lines 88 - 95 belongs to the methodology section not to introduction. Please at the end of introduction describe what new knowledge your study brings. 

Methodology - I am a bit concerned about lack of Ethical approval. In line 142 it is not biograpfic data you should rename it to demographic data. Line 181 it is better to use term association than relationship. Proofreading is necessary. Have you calculate Cronbach alpha for each instruments. 

Results - it would be interesting to know is there association between demographic features and burnout. 

Discussion - connect international findings with your Tables. 

Conclusion - do not repeat aim in conclusion. Do not reference in conclusion. Summarize what is your recommendation according to the finding. 

English need to be proofread. 

Author Response

Dear Editor,

We have prepared one table (1- peer reviewer corrections required) in which we have included the following information:

1. the first column contains the number of comments of peer reviewer, following the sequence present in the revised paper;
2. the second column contains the Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions:
3. the third column contains the modifications made, their explanation and, above all, the number of page and lines in which these modifications have been included.

Title: WORK AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS ON JOB BURNOUT: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AMONG DOCTORS FOR SUSTAINABLE WORK 

Ref: sustainability-2953147

REV. TABLE NUMBER 5

I look forward to Your feedback.

Best regards

Palermo, 3.04.2024

Round 2

Reviewer 5 Report (New Reviewer)

Dear authors,

your revisions are satisfactory, I am happy to say from my side there is no any objections. Congratulations.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Referee report on "Work and environmental factors on job burnout: A cross-sectional study among doctors for sustainable work”

This is a nice and informative paper that studies an important topic. In my opinion, the paper is already more or less publishable and my comments are minor.

1. Page 2: When you present your subject-matter, make it clear from the beginning that your work is about Italy and Palermo. Don’t force the readers wait until the “materials and methods” section to find it out.

2. As your study is about Palermo, add a paragraph to motivate your choice. Is Palermo specific for something? Might it be that the findings of your study are not fully representative for Italy, as Palermo is believed to be a rather poor and densely populated city? Please address it somewhere.

3. Lines 408 – 411 are in bold. Why? Please correct.

4. Finally, as from the very beginning you mention economic growth and economic well-being (for example, in the second and third sentences in the introduction), to better connect your study to the general field of economics, to the end of the conclusion I would suggest adding the following:

“In addition, in view of the broadly established positive relationship between individual health and economic outcomes (Azarnert, 2006; 2020), prevention of the observed burnout syndrome among medical professionals and resulting improvement of efficiency in public hospitals can contribute to an improvement in economic well-being in the general population.”

References

Azarnert, L.V. (2006) Child mortality, fertility and human capital accumulation. Journal of Population Economics 19, 285–297.

Azarnert, L.V.  (2020) Health capital provision and human capital accumulation. Oxford Economic Papers 72, 633–650.

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Abstract The background is too much, and it is suggested to delete it. The main conclusions do not stand out. Please review the findings and revise the abstract to highlight new insights from the study.

2. Introduction: Writing scattered. There are too many paragraphs, and it is suggested to re-organize and segment them to highlight innovation.

3. In terms of research on the elimination of burnout in the work environment and personnel, and even sustainable development, the results are partially lacking sufficient evidence. From the present presentation, the chart of the analysis part is simple in form, without a framework logic, and the content is too small, which cannot support the core point of view of the whole article.

4. The schedule is missing. Please add.

Therefore, it is recommended that the manuscript be rejected.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper highlights the balance between professional and personal lives in the health promotion system as an essential aspect of sustainable development. The authors show that medical professionals (doctors, nurses, etc.) face increasing pressures for several reasons, such as limited organizational support, insufficient resources, etc. The authors conclude that the improvement of interpersonal relationships and resources. The paper is informative but requires some revisions to be published in Sustainability. 

1. As the authors point out, improving healthcare systems is crucial for promoting sustainable development. The authors should briefly discuss sustainable development in their introduction. In this vein, the following two papers should be included: "Broad strokes towards a grand theory in the analysis of sustainable development: a return to the classical political economy", New Political Economy, 27(5), pp. 866-878, and (b) "The concept of sustainable development: From its beginning to the contemporary issues", Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 21(1), 67-94.
2.  The authors should discuss the notion of sustainable work further. Sustainable work is an essential aspect of accelerating the transition to Sustainable Development.
3. The authors stress the importance of improving the delivery of healthcare services. In this vein, they should provide a separate section to discuss the policy implications of their research. 
4. A more analytical description of the structured questionnaire would be helpful.
5. What are the theoretical implications of this survey? 

Moderate editing of the English language is required.

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors, 

Thank you for the opportunity to read the manuscript, which has many merits, but there are a few things I could improve on:

1. The introduction is too long and it is better to divide it into an introduction and a literature analysis section.

2. The introduction needs a goal, and research questions.

3. Alternative theories about burnout, such as street-level bureaucracy, should be presented in the theoretical part. For inspiration, you can use it here: Civinskas, R., Dvorak, J., & Šumskas, G. (2021). Beyond the front-line: The coping strategies and discretion of Lithuanian street-level bureaucracy during COVID-19. Corvinus journal of sociology and social policy, 12(1), 3-28.

4. Nothing in the literature analysis is written about sustainable development, although it is important according to the authors and they even single out the keyword. For inspiration, see Burksiene, V., Dvorak, J., & Burbulyte-Tsiskarishvili, G. (2018). Sustainability and sustainability marketing in competing for the title of European Capital of Culture. Organization, 51(1), 66-78.

5. Section 3 Results describes in detail who the respondents were, but it is not very clear how the doctor could be 25 years old because usually this process takes up to 10 years. Maybe some interns, or residents here???

6. Managerial implications should be added to the conclusions. The conclusions are very modest and need rewriting. 

7. The list of references must be corrected according to the MDPI requirements. Sources 3-5; 11; 15;35; 59 must to have authors, year, descriptions. Source 40;42; 65 and maybe more incorrect style of citation.

8. In the discussion section some sentences are copied from other article but presented like findings from this manuscript: The practical implications of this study have substantial significance for healthcare 349 institutions and their management. One of the key management issues is the importance 350 of recognizing the negative impact of burnout burnou ors work [63]. 

This study adds something more by showing the protective role of empowerment that buffers the effect of burnout burnoutially in light of the physician exodus phenomenon discussed above. 

All the best