Development and Validation of Single-Session Digital Self-Guided Intervention to Prevent Burnout & Improve Wellness

The Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) is a 16-item self-report measure of occupational burnout, comprising three subscales: Exhaustion (5 items), Cynicism (5 items), and Professional Efficacy (6 items). Each item is rated on a 7-point frequency scale ranging from 1 ("never") to 7 ("every day").

Subscale scores are calculated as the sum of items within each subscale. Possible ranges are: Exhaustion 5-35, Cynicism 5-35, and Professional Efficacy 6-42. Higher scores on the Exhaustion and Cynicism subscales indicate greater burnout (worse outcome). Higher scores on the Professional Efficacy subscale indicate greater perceived effectiveness (better outcome).

The Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10; Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983) is a 10-item self-report measure of the degree to which situations in one's life are appraised as unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overloaded. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale from 0 ("never") to 5 ("very often"). Four positively-worded items are reverse-scored prior to summation. Total scores range from 0 to 50. Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress (worse outcome).

The Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8; Kroenke et al., 2009) is an 8-item self-report measure of depressive symptom severity over the past two weeks. Each item is rated on a 4-point scale from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). The total score is the sum of all items. Total scores range from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicate greater depressive symptom severity (worse outcome).

The Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 (GAD-7; Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, & Löwe, 2006) is a 7-item self-report measure of anxiety symptom severity over the past two weeks. Each item is rated on a 4-point scale from 0 ("not at all") to 3 ("nearly every day"). The total score is the sum of all items. Total scores range from 0 to 21. Higher scores indicate greater anxiety symptom severity (worse outcome).

The General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12; Goldberg et al., 1997) is a 12-item self-report screen for psychological distress and general mental health over the past few weeks. Each item is rated on a 4-point response scale (e.g., "more so than usual," "about the same as usual," "less so than usual," "much less than usual"). Items are scored using the Likert method (0-1-2-3 per item), with negatively-worded items reverse-coded so that higher item scores reflect worse health. Total scores range from 0 to 36. Higher scores indicate greater psychological distress and worse general mental health (worse outcome).

The World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5; WHO, 1998) is a 5-item self-report measure of subjective psychological well-being over the past two weeks. Each item is rated on a 6-point scale from 0 ("at no time") to 5 ("all of the time"). The raw total score (0-25) is multiplied by 4 to yield a percentage-based score. Final scores range from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater subjective well-being (better outcome). A score below 50 is conventionally considered to indicate reduced well-being.

The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-3 (UWES-3; Schaufeli, Shimazu, Hakanen, Salanova, & De Witte, 2019) is a 3-item ultra-short self-report measure of work engagement, with one item each for vigor, dedication, and absorption. Each item is rated on a 7-point frequency scale from 0 ("never") to 6 ("always / every day"). The total score is computed as the mean of the three items. The total score ranges from 0 to 6. Higher scores indicate greater work engagement (better outcome).

This measure consists of three single-item "readiness rulers" adapted from the Motivational Interviewing framework (Miller & Rollnick, 2013). Each ruler asks participants to rate, on a 10-point numeric rating scale from 1 to 10, one of the following dimensions of motivation to improve their well-being:

• Importance - "At this moment, how important is working towards improving your well-being?" anchored from 1 ("not important") to 10 ("very important").
• Readiness - "How ready are you to work towards improving your well-being?" anchored from 1 ("not ready") to 10 ("completely ready").
• Confidence - "How confident are you in your ability to work towards improving your well-being?" anchored from 1 ("not confident") to 10 ("completely confident"). A composite score is computed as the sum of the three items, ranging from 3 to 30. Higher scores indicate greater readiness to engage in well-being improvement efforts (better outcome).

The Program Feedback Scale (PFS) is a brief self-report measure of program acceptability developed for use with single-session digital interventions. The version administered in this study contains seven agreement-format items rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree"). Items include, for example, "I enjoyed the program," "This program was easy to use," "I would recommend this program to a friend going through a hard time," and "I agree with the program's message."The primary acceptability score is the sum of the seven Likert items, ranging from 7 to 35. Higher scores indicate greater program acceptability (better outcome).

This measure consists of three investigator-developed items based on the anchor-based methodology described by Anvari and Lakens (2021), used to capture participants' subjective perception of immediate change following the intervention. Each item asks the participant to rate themselves "compared to before this activity" on a 7-point Likert scale anchored at 1 ("Much Less") and 7 ("Much More"), with the midpoint (4) representing "about the same." The three items assess perceived change in: (1) confidence in one's ability to manage one's well-being; (2) hopefulness; and (3) confidence in one's ability to solve the problems one is currently facing. A total score is computed as the sum of the three items, ranging from 3 to 21. Higher scores indicate a greater perceived positive impact of the intervention (better outcome).