Reassessing the most popularly suggested measurement models and measurement invariance of the Maslach Burnout Inventory – human service survey among Vietnamese healthcare professionals

Figures & data

Figure 1. Examination of MBI-HSS different models. Model 1. Three-factor 22 items, Model 2. Three-factor 20 items, Model 3. Second-order three-factor 22 items, Model 4. Second-order three-factor 20 items, Model 5. Bi-factor 22 items, Model 6. Bi-factor 20 items.

Table 1. Sample characteristics (N = 1162).

Variables	Sample
Gender
Female	762 (65.8%)
Male	400 (34.2%)
Age	21–70 (M = 32.12, SD = 8.19)
Marital status
Single	458 (39.4%)
Married	680 (58.5%)
Others	24 (2.1%)
Number of children
0	424 (36.5%)
1	226 (19.4%)
2	379 (32.6%)
3 and over	38 (3.3%)
Missing	95 (8.2%)
Work position
Nurse	788 (67.8%)
Doctor	374 (32.2%)
Year of experience
≤5	601 (51.7%)
6–10	244 (21.0%)
11–15	115 (10%)
>15	202 (17.3%)
Type of hospitals
Private hospitals	130 (11.2%)
Public hospitals without financial autonomy	295 (25.4%)
Public hospitals with financial autonomy	737 (63.4%)
Risk for mental health disorders
Yes	361 (31.1%)
No	801 (68.9%)

Table 2. Fit indexes of alternative measurement models of MBI-HSS-MP.

Model	χ^2	df	p	CFI	TLI	BIC	RMSEA [90% CI]	SRMR
Model 1. Three-factor 22 items	921	167	<0.001	0.96	0.95	1528	0.05 [0.05–0.06]	0.06
Model 2. Three-factor 20 items	1443	160	<0.001	0.87	0.85	1796	0.08 [0.08–0.09],	0.07
Model 3. Second-order three-factor 22 items	925	167	<0.001	0.93	0.93	1650	0.07 [0.06–0.07]	0.06
Model 4. Second-order three-factor 20 items	1464	161	<0.001	0.86	0.84	1810	0.08 [0.08–0.09]	0.07
Model 5. Bi-factor 22 items	938	167	<0.001	0.89	0.88	1700	0.07 [0.07–0.08]	0.06
Model 6. Bi-factor 20 items	1460	161	<0.001	0.88	0.88	1800	0.08 [0.08–0.09]	0.07

χ² – normal theory weighted least squares chi-square; df – degrees of freedom; CFI – comparative fit index; TLI – Tucker–Lewis index; BIC – Bayesian information criteria; RMSEA – root mean square error of approximation; SRMR – standardized root mean square residual.

Figure 2. Factor loadings for three-factor model.

Table 3. Fit indexes indicating gender, occupations, and status of mental health measurement invariance for the three-factor model of MBI-HSS among Vietnamese healthcare professionals.

Gender group CFA	χ^2	df	p	CFI	TLI	RMSEA (90% CI)	SRMR
Men	483	168	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.07 [0.06–0.08]	0.06
Women	679	168	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.06 [0.06–0.07]	0.07
Invariance nested model
Configural (unconstrained model)	1163	336	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.06
Metric (equal factor loadings)	1196	355	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.06
Scalar (equal item intercepts)	1211	361	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.07
Occupational group CFA
Nurses	718	168	<0.001	0.93	0.91	0.07 [0.06–0.07]	0.07
Doctors	479	168	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.07 [0.06–0.08]	0.06
Invariance nested model
Configural (unconstrained model)	1197	336	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.05–0.05]	0.07
Metric (equal factor loadings)	1242	335	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.05–0.05]	0.07
Scalar (equal item intercepts)	1252	361	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.07
Mental health group CFA
With DASS (N = 361)	598	168	<0.001	0.89	0.87	0.09 [0.08–0.09]	0.08
Non-DASS (N = 801)	572	168	<0.001	0.95	0.94	0.05 [0.05–0.06]	0.05
Invariance nested model
Configural (unconstrained model)	1151	334	<0.001	0.94	0.91	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.08
Metric (equal factor loadings)	1172	353	<0.001	0.94	0.92	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.08
Scalar (equal item intercepts)	1226	359	<0.001	0.93	0.91	0.05 [0.04–0.05]	0.10

Figure A1. Fit index and factor loadings for three-factor model on two random sub-samples.