ReviewJournal of health psychology2025
Overestimating prevalence? Rethinking boundaries and confounders of moral distress.
Review in Journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring moral distress in Swedish maternal and neonatal healthcare: validation of an adapted MDS‑R and development of a criterion‑based index.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The effects of moral distress on burnout and mental well-being across healthcare and care occupations: Do age and work resources matter?Journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Nurses' experiences of moral suffering: A qualitative interview study.Nursing ethics · 2026Article
- Person-centred environments and nursesFrontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Article
- Causes of moral distress among midwives: A scoping review.Nursing ethics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moral distress denotes a negative reaction to a morally challenging situation. It has been associated with adverse outcomes for healthcare professionals, patients and healthcare institutions. We argue that existing definitions, along with measures of moral distress, compromise the validity of empirical research. First, the definition and measurement of moral distress conflate moral events and psychological distress, even though they are distinct phenomena that should be assessed independently. Second, in many studies, there is a lack of clarity in distinguishing between moral and non-moral events. Finally, prior research on moral distress often overlooks the substantial body of evidence demonstrating the impact of diverse work-related factors, beyond moral events, on both distress and job retention. These challenges might undermine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at alleviating moral distress. We outline a comprehensive research agenda that encompasses conceptual clarifications, the refinement of data collection instruments, the design of studies and the application of appropriate statistical methods.
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.