ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2020
Ethical Reasoning and Moral Distress in Social Care Among Long-Term Care Staff.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence, Predictors, and Experience of Moral Suffering in Nursing and Care Home Staff during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- An Integrative Review of Registered Nurses' Understandings of Organisational Culture and Cultures of Care in the Aged Care Sector.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Review
- Moral distress among healthcare professionals in long-term care settings: a scoping review.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2025Article
- An Intersectional Analysis of Moral Distress and Intention to Leave Employment Among Long-Term Care Providers in British Columbia.Journal of aging and health · 2024Article
- Nurses' ethical challenges when providing care in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic.Nursing ethics · 2023Article
- Life Goes On.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are studies on the normative ethical frameworks used by long-term care staff and studies proposing how staff should reason, but few studies explore how staff actually reason. This study reports on the ethical reasoning process and experiences of moral distress of long-term care staff in the provision of social care. Seven interdisciplinary focus groups were conducted with twenty front-line staff. Staff typically did not have difficulty determining the ethical decision and/or action; however, they frequently experience moral distress. To manage these experiences of moral distress in making ethical decisions, staff 1) comply with being told what to do out of fear of consequences, 2) defer decisions to family, 3) "have a meeting," 4) socialization into and acceptance of workplace culture. Findings suggest that to better understand how and why staff make ethical decisions and improve quality and ethical care, we must explore the interaction between front-line practice and organizational and public policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.