ArticleBMC palliative care2025
Ethical challenges in sensitive research: a reflective narrative on managing the clinician-researcher dual role.
Article in BMC palliative care, 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.
- Nurses' grief after patient loss: a cross-sectional study of coping strategies and emotional impact in a Nigerian tertiary hospital.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Community participation and consultation in palliative and end-of-life care: Building death literacy through a participatory theory of change.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
- Healing beyond the physical: Ethical approaches to emotional support in post-stroke recovery.African journal of disability · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConducting sensitive research in healthcare settings often presents complex ethical challenges, particularly when clinicians assume a dual role as researchers. This dual role, while providing valuable insight, can lead to ethical dilemmas when professional responsibilities intersect with research obligations, especially in resource-limited and culturally sensitive environments. This reflective narrative explores these ethical tensions through the lens of a qualitative study involving men living with advanced prostate cancer and their family caregivers.
methodThe study employed a qualitative design, drawing on individual and dyadic interviews, as well as focus group discussions with healthcare professionals. A reflective narrative approach was chosen as the method to critically engage with the researcher’s personal experiences, ethical dilemmas, and the emotional complexities of conducting research in this context. The approach was justified as it provides a means of exploring both the data and the reflective, situated nature of the clinician–researcher role, which is essential for understanding the broader implications of conducting sensitive research.
resultsThe analysis revealed several key ethical challenges, including emotional labour, professional role conflicts, and the management of therapeutic boundaries. The clinician–researcher dual role significantly shaped participant consent, data collection, and interpretation of findings. It highlighted the vulnerability of both participants and researchers, especially in emotionally charged, culturally sensitive contexts. Ethical tensions often arose between maintaining professional objectivity and addressing the immediate care needs of participants, underscoring the importance of reflexivity in navigating these complexities.
conclusionThis reflection calls for enhanced ethical preparation and emotional resilience among nurse researchers, particularly those working with vulnerable populations in sensitive research areas like palliative care. The study emphasises the need for clear boundary protocols, structured reflexive journaling, and regular peer debriefing to help clinician–researchers navigate their dual roles while maintaining ethical integrity. The findings contribute to the discourse on ethical praxis in qualitative health research, offering practical strategies for managing the inherent challenges of conducting research in ethically complex environments.
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.