ArticleNursing reports (Pavia, Italy)2024
Validation of Two Instruments for the Measurement of Dehumanization and Self-Dehumanization in Healthcare Settings.
Article in Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Measuring the felt sense of dehumanization: A COSMIN systematic review of the psychometric properties of self- and meta-dehumanization measures.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Pooled it
- Self-Dehumanization Is Related to Worse Mental Health in Veterinarians.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Measurement of Dehumanization, Self-Dehumanization, and Empathy as Mediating Factors Among Healthcare Professionals.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding and addressing dehumanization in healthcare is crucial due to its profound impact on patient care, ethical implications on patient dignity and autonomy, and its potential to affect the psychological well-being of healthcare professionals. The primary aim of this study was to establish reliable and valid instruments measuring two different types of dehumanization, namely animalistic dehumanization (i.e., stripping one of their uniquely human characteristics) and mechanistic dehumanization (i.e., stripping one of their human nature characteristics) among healthcare professionals. In this cross-sectional validation study among healthcare professionals, we tested measures of both animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization, focusing on the dehumanization of patients (hetero-dehumanization) and oneself (self-dehumanization), respectively. All measures were developed and validated based on a concept analysis, a literature review, and an appraisal of pre-existing scales. The research was conducted among 400 nurses and medical doctors employed in Greek public hospitals. Coefficient validity ratio results showed that 100% of items were acceptable for both measures. The newly established and validated hetero-dehumanization scale encompassed two factors (factor 1: animalistic dehumanization, factor 2: mechanistic dehumanization; Cronbach's alpha was equal to 0.86 for each measure). The self-dehumanization scale was a mono-factorial measure of mechanistic dehumanization (Cronbach's alpha = 0.97). Two validated measures of (self- and hetero-) animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization measures were developed for the assessment of dehumanization among health professionals, which will form the basis for future research in this important scientific field.
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.