Table 3.
Quality ratings of non-intervention studies included in the review.
| References | Aims and objectives | Sufficient sample information | Reliability of burnout/ stress measures | Validity of burnout/ stress measures | Reliability of other relevant study constructs | Ethical consideration | Alignment of research question(s) and data analysis | Clear structure of manuscript |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amri et al. (2020) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Carreon et al. (2021) | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Collie (2021) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Liu et al. (2021) | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| Ma et al. (2021) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Mari et al. (2021) | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | – | 3 | 1 | 3 |
| Oducado et al. (2021) | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | – | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Ozamiz-Etxebarria et al. (2021) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | – | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Panisoara et al. (2020) | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| Pressley (2021) | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Rabaglietti et al. (2021) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Sokal et al. (2020a) | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| Sokal et al. (2020b) | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Weißenfels et al. (2021) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Zhou and Yao (2020) | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Aims and objectives: 3 = clear and comprehensible research question(s) or hypotheses; 2 = limitations in clarity and comprehensibility of research question(s) or hypotheses; 1 = no clear and comprehensible research question(s) or hypotheses.
Sufficient sample information, i.e., sample size, country, age, gender, school type, professional experience, teaching remotely: 3 = all information available or one of these aspects missing; 2 = two to three of these aspects missing; 1 = four or more of these aspects missing.
Reliability of burnout/stress measures: 3 = reliability reported and acceptable (α ≥ 0.65); 2 = reliability reported but not acceptable (α <0.65); 1 = reliability not reported.
Validity of burnout/stress measures: 3 = completely valid; 2 = minor limitations in validity; 1 = major limitations in validity.
Reliability of other relevant study constructs: 3 = reliability reported and acceptable (α ≥ 0.65); 2 = reliability reported but not acceptable (α <0.65); 1 = reliability not reported; – = no other scales used.
Ethical consideration: 3 = approval of ethics commission; 2 = no approval of ethics commission required according to the authors; 1 = no approval of ethics commission reported.
Alignment of research question(s) and data analysis: 3 = robust analyses and data that answer research question(s) or hypotheses; 2 = minor limitations in data and/or analyses; 1 = data and/or analyses exhibit major limitations and do not answer research question(s) or hypotheses.
Clear structure of manuscript: 3 = clear structure according to APA-standards; 2 = minor limitations in structure according to APA-standards; 1 = major limitations in structure according to APA-standards.