ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2025
The second victim phenomenon among midwives in Austria (SeViD-A3): A cross-sectional study.
Article in European journal of midwifery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Presence and detectability of the second victim phenomenon in German-speaking medical professionals involved in dysphagia and respiratory therapy: cross-sectional survey research (SeViD-V).BMC health services research · 2026Article
- The second victim phenomenon in Japan: prevalence, impact, and associated factors- the JaSeVic study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Second victims among emergency medical dispatchers in Germany: a cross-sectional study (SeViD-VII).International journal of emergency medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMidwives frequently encounter adverse events, potentially leading to the Second Victim Phenomenon (SVP), a condition marked by emotional distress, self-doubt, and psychological symptoms. This study investigates the prevalence, key triggers, symptom severity, and support needs of midwives in Austria affected by SVP.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among Austrian midwives (n=487) using the SeViD-questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were applied to assess SVP prevalence, symptoms, and support measures. Binary logistic regression analyses examined predictors of SVP occurrence and symptom severity, while the Mann-Whitney U test compared support preferences between affected and non-affected midwives.
resultsSVP prevalence was 94.3%, with self-doubt (52.5%), guilt (47.0%), and flashbacks (41.8%) as the most pronounced symptoms. Work experience and workload did not predict SVP occurrence. However, events involving patient harm (OR=1.92; 95% CI: 1.11-3.31, p=0.02) and higher neuroticism scores (OR=1.62; 95% CI: 1.24-2.11, p<0.01) significantly predicted high symptom severity. Affected midwives rated professional counseling as less helpful than non-affected peers (p=0.03, r=0.02).
conclusionsThe high prevalence of SVP underscores the need for comprehensive, accessible support for Austrian midwives. Peer support programs should be central, alongside preventive and reactive measures. Support must be inclusive of self-employed midwives. Targeted interventions can enhance mental well-being, improve patient safety, and strengthen healthcare quality.
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.