SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
Prevalence and risk factors of compassion fatigue in gynecological and obstetric nurses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- Compassion fatigue and its associated factors among clinical nurses: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Prevalence and determinants of compassion fatigue among nurses in a district hospital in Bangladesh.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Unpopular patients and compassion fatigue among nurses: a mixed-methods study on emotional burden, workforce well-being, and patient safety.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Association between workload, compassion fatigue and presenteeism among maternal and newborn health professionals: the moderated role of self-compassion.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Development and Internal Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Compassion Fatigue Risk Stratification Among Clinical Nurses in China.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity of compassion fatigue and its relationship with resilience among nurses: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in public health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study systematically evaluated the incidence and influencing factors of compassion fatigue (CF) among obstetric and gynecological nurses. Methods: Retrieve the cross-sectional study on the current occurrence status of CF among obstetric and gynecological nurses in the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WANFANG database. Database were searched from the database establishment to September 8, 2024. Literature screening, data extraction and bias risk assessment were performed independently by two researchers. Stata17.0 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 15 studies involving 6,799 obstetrics and gynecology nurses were included in the analysis. The meta-analysis results indicated that the incidence of moderate to severe CF among these nurses was 77.6% (ES = 0.776, 95% CI: 0.725-0.827). Additionally, the scores for compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary trauma were 29.835 (95% CI: 27.703-31.967), 28.116 (95% CI: 25.458-30.775), and 25.021 (95% CI: 21.681-28.360), respectively, all exceeding the critical threshold, indicating a high risk of CF in obstetrics and gynecology nurses. The identified influencing factors for CF included exposure to traumatic events, number of children, social support, sleep quality, health status, years of service, and hospital region and grade. Conclusion: The prevalence of CF among obstetrics and gynecology nurses is notably high, necessitating the implementation of individualized intervention strategies based on the identified influencing factors.
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.