Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37670362›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2023

Moral lessons from residents, close relatives and volunteers about the COVID-19 restrictions in Dutch and Flemish nursing homes.

Elleke Landeweer, Nina Hovenga, Suzie Noten, Floor Vinckers, Jasper de Witte, Annerieke Stoop, Sytse Zuidema

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Elleke LandeweerDepartment of Primary and Long-term care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, 9713 GZ, The Netherlands. e.g.m.landeweer@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8856-6559
Nina HovengaDepartment of Primary and Long-term care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, 9713 GZ, The Netherlands.
Suzie NotenTRANZO, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, Tilburg, 5000 LE, The Netherlands.
Floor VinckersDepartment of Primary and Long-term care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, 9713 GZ, The Netherlands.
Jasper de WitteHIVA- Research Institute for Work and Society, KU Leuven, P.O. Box 5300, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Annerieke StoopTRANZO, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, Tilburg, 5000 LE, The Netherlands.
Sytse ZuidemaDepartment of Primary and Long-term care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, 9713 GZ, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLTilburg University · NLVIB-KU Leuven Center for Microbiology · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, national governments took restrictive measures, such as a visitors ban, prohibition of group activities and quarantine, to protect nursing home residents against infections. As 'safety' prevailed, residents and close relatives had no choice but to accept the restrictions. Their perspectives are relevant because the policies had a major impact on them, but they were excluded from the policy decisions. In this study we looked into the moral attitudes of residents, close relatives and volunteers regarding the restrictions in retrospect, and what moral lessons they considered important.

methodsWe conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with residents and close relatives and one focus group meeting with volunteers working in nursing homes. Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively. Subsequently, three Socratic dialogue meetings with residents, close relatives and volunteers were organized in which first analysis outcomes were discussed and dialogues were fostered into moral lessons for future pandemics. Outcomes were combined with moral theory following an empirical bioethics design.

resultsCritical perspectives regarding the COVID-19 restrictions grew in time. Various moral values were compromised and steered moral lessons for our future. The participants recognized three moral lessons as most important. First, constructing tailored (well-balanced) solutions in practice is desirable. Second, proper recognition is needed for the caring role that close relatives fulfill in practice. Third, a responsive power distribution should be in place that includes all stakeholder perspectives who are affected by the restrictions. DISCUSSION: Comparing the results with moral theory strengthens the plea for inclusion of all stakeholder groups in decision-making processes. To further concretize the moral lessons, tailored solutions can be realized with the use of moral case deliberations. Proper recognition includes actions addressing moral repair and including counter-stories in the debate. Responsive power distribution starts with providing clear and trustworthy information and including all perspectives.

Indexed as

COVID-19EthnicityHumansMoralsNursing HomesVolunteersClose relativesCOVID-19Moral lessonsNursing homesResidentsRestrictive measuresVolunteers

Identifiers

PMID37670362
PMCPMC10481572
OpenAlexW4386448912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.