Next Article in Journal
Reflections on a Global Crisis: From Response to Readiness—A Multidisciplinary Perspective on COVID-19
Previous Article in Journal
Underground Built Heritage
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Presenteeism and Burnout in Nurses: A Review of the Literature

Encyclopedia 2025, 5(3), 93; https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5030093
by Ana Catarina Vaz 1, Maria Vermelho 2, Miriam Silva 3, Pedro Costa 4, Sónia Margarida Dinis 5, Sandy Severino 6,7,8, João Tomás 6,9,10, Isabel Rabiais 6,9,11 and Luís Sousa 6,9,12,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Encyclopedia 2025, 5(3), 93; https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5030093
Submission received: 10 May 2025 / Revised: 13 June 2025 / Accepted: 30 June 2025 / Published: 3 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Social Sciences)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for the opportunity to review your manuscript. The topic of the literature review is highly important but the presentation of the findings offers little value to the research community.

Considering that the authors included systematic reviews and primary studies that employed both quantitative and qualitative research methods, the synthesis should be structured to clearly demonstrate the contribution of all these study types in enhancing our understanding of the relationship between burnout and presenteeism.

Furthermore, a more comprehensive presentation of the wider literature is needed, along with greater engagement with it, to illustrate what this review contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

Author Response

Comments 1: Considering that the authors included systematic reviews and primary studies that employed both quantitative and qualitative research methods, the synthesis should be structured to clearly demonstrate the contribution of all these study types in enhancing our understanding of the relationship between burnout and presenteeism.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments. In order to improve the quality of our article we followed your suggestion and introduced Table 5 which synthesizes the articles and summarizes the findings.

 

Comment 2: Furthermore, a more comprehensive presentation of the wider literature is needed, along with greater engagement with it, to illustrate what this review contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on this we restructured our discussion by reorganizing it in thematic subsections which an integrated synthesis of data. We also deepened the introduction and discussion. Thank you for this opportunity.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In general, the manuscript has followed the frame of scientific review and has focussed on assessing the relationship between presenteeism and burnout in nurses

Research question is very shallow as it doesn’t have research interest rather than compiling the existing literature. Please refine it.

Please provide the search string in detail in the manuscript with Boolean terms as well

Presentation and analysis of results could be a bit more organised as authors may think of having a table for the ease of reading

Authors are encouraged to contribute to policy formulation and analysis in the ‘discussion’ part of the manuscript, as it will be a guideline for policy makers. May focus on Asian context as major selected studies falls from the region.

Author Response

Comment 1: Research question is very shallow as it doesn’t have research interest rather than compiling the existing literature. Please refine it.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your suggestion, it is very pertinent. Our intent, from the beginning, was to simply map the most recent evidence regarding the relationship between presenteism and burnout, and show the most recent findings on the subject matter. 

Comment 2: Please provide the search string in detail in the manuscript with Boolean terms as well.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We incorporated the search string in the text (all alterations are highlighted). 

Comment 3: Presentation and analysis of results could be a bit more organised as authors may think of having a table for the ease of reading.

Response 3: Thank you for your suggestion. We included Table 5, according to your suggestion, where the articles' main findings are summarized.

Comment 4: Authors are encouraged to contribute to policy formulation and analysis in the ‘discussion’ part of the manuscript, as it will be a guideline for policy makers. May focus on Asian context as major selected studies falls from the region.

Response 4: Your comments and suggestions are very pertinent, and thank you for the opportunity to improve our article. We included a specific topic in the discussion where policy formulation is addressed. Also in the discussion, we address the Asian context. Hopefully we were able to fulfill what was proposed.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you for the opportunity to read your manuscript.

The article is devoted to the current topic of the relationship between presentism and burnout among nurses. The authors searched for articles on this topic, selected 8 of them and described and summarized their results in detail. The logic of the search and selection of articles is presented clearly and sufficiently.

At the same time, there are a number of recommendations:

  1. The authors did not sufficiently disclose the issue in the introduction. It is necessary to expand the information on approaches to understanding presentism and burnout, factors influencing presentism, as well as its impact on the psyche and health of workers. For which areas have the connections between burnout and presentism been studied more thoroughly? These additions will allow a deeper understanding of this phenomenon, as well as expand the list of sources, which are clearly insufficient now.
  2.  The authors need to structure the description of the research results. Highlight the topics and problems that are analyzed. In addition to the table in the attachment, I would like to make a more multiple table in which one could clearly see the severity, connections and factors of presentism in each study. This would allow us to draw a conclusion about what has been studied more and what remains unaddressed.
  3.  In the discussion of the results, it is necessary to add more clearly future directions of research that would help to eliminate the gap in scientific knowledge on this topic.
  4.  Conclusions should be formulated more clearly.  In this regard, the article requires revision. Best wishes, Reviewer

Author Response

Comment 1: The authors did not sufficiently disclose the issue in the introduction. It is necessary to expand the information on approaches to understanding presentism and burnout, factors influencing presentism, as well as its impact on the psyche and health of workers. For which areas have the connections between burnout and presentism been studied more thoroughly? These additions will allow a deeper understanding of this phenomenon, as well as expand the list of sources, which are clearly insufficient now.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We introduced a paragraph in the introduction in order to address the issues you raised. We were concerned that the introduction may become too lengthy. Hopefully we were able to approach this question adequately.

Comment 2: The authors need to structure the description of the research results. Highlight the topics and problems that are analyzed. In addition to the table in the attachment, I would like to make a more multiple table in which one could clearly see the severity, connections and factors of presentism in each study. This would allow us to draw a conclusion about what has been studied more and what remains unaddressed.

Response 2: Thank you for the opportunity to improve our paper. To address this question we introduced Table 5 and restructured the discussion.

Comment 3: In the discussion of the results, it is necessary to add more clearly future directions of research that would help to eliminate the gap in scientific knowledge on this topic.

Response 3: Thank you for your suggestion. We included this aspect in the discussion as suggested (all alterations are highlight throughout the text).

Comment 4: Conclusions should be formulated more clearly.

Response 4: Once again, thank you for your suggestion and opportunity of improvement. We restructured the conclusion. Hopefully we were able to fulfill your expectations.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for taking up all the suggestions and incorporating it in the revised version.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you for your additions and corrections.

The article can be recommended for publication.
Best wishes, reviewer

Back to TopTop