Payam Khanlari1 
, Leila Soleimani2 , AhmadAli NoorbalaTafti1 , Elahe Amouzadeh3 , Seyed Abolfazl Zakarian * 4
, Leila Soleimani2 , AhmadAli NoorbalaTafti1 , Elahe Amouzadeh3 , Seyed Abolfazl Zakarian * 4
1- Tehran University of Medical Sciences
2- university of social welfare and rehabilitation sciences
3- Hamadan university of medical sciences
4- Tehran University of Medical Sciences ,szakerian@yahoo.com
2- university of social welfare and rehabilitation sciences
3- Hamadan university of medical sciences
4- Tehran University of Medical Sciences ,
Abstract: (41 Views)
Introduction: Mental health in the workplace is a critical factor influencing both employee well-being and organizational productivity. However, issues such as stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout can significantly impair job performance and overall quality of life. While numerous tools have been developed to assess mental health, many are not specifically designed or updated for work environments. As the complexity of the workplace continues to increase, accurate identification and evaluation of these conditions become increasingly essential. This study aims to review available tools and identify the most proper methods for screening and assessing mental health issues in the workplace.
Material and method: A scoping review approach was used to identify mental health assessment tools applicable to workplace settings. The PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched using keywords related to mental health at work. Studies published after 2020 were included, focusing on tools developed and validated in work environments. Two authors independently extracted and reviewed data from selected studies. Tools were categorized based on their aims and specific characteristics.
Results: After screening, 12 studies were selected from a primary set of 746 papers.. The extracted tools were designed to assess stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout. While most tools were developed for general settings or the public, some were appropriated to specific occupational groups, such as military personnel and healthcare workers. Burnout assessment tools were the most frequently referenced category.
Conclusion: Newer tools, such as the Work Stress Screener, Occupational Depression Inventory, and Burnout Assessment Tool, offer potential advantages over older instruments. Shorter, specialized tools are recommended to assess job anxiety effectively. Organizations should prioritize selecting tools that align with their employees' specific working conditions to promote mental health and productivity.
Material and method: A scoping review approach was used to identify mental health assessment tools applicable to workplace settings. The PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched using keywords related to mental health at work. Studies published after 2020 were included, focusing on tools developed and validated in work environments. Two authors independently extracted and reviewed data from selected studies. Tools were categorized based on their aims and specific characteristics.
Results: After screening, 12 studies were selected from a primary set of 746 papers.. The extracted tools were designed to assess stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout. While most tools were developed for general settings or the public, some were appropriated to specific occupational groups, such as military personnel and healthcare workers. Burnout assessment tools were the most frequently referenced category.
Conclusion: Newer tools, such as the Work Stress Screener, Occupational Depression Inventory, and Burnout Assessment Tool, offer potential advantages over older instruments. Shorter, specialized tools are recommended to assess job anxiety effectively. Organizations should prioritize selecting tools that align with their employees' specific working conditions to promote mental health and productivity.
Keywords: Mental Health Assessment Tools, Occupational Stress, Occupational Depression, job Burnout, job Anxiety
Type of Study: Review |
Received: 2024/11/18 | Accepted: 2025/01/19
Received: 2024/11/18 | Accepted: 2025/01/19
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
