ArticleNursing ethics2026
Duality of roles and moral injury in defence force nurses.
Article in Nursing ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundMilitary medics, who are both professional soldiers and qualified nurses, can face situations where their training and moral ethos conflict in the performance of duty. Their role has intrinsic duality. They are both a soldier, thus a member of a military organisation as well as well as a healer, a nurse with a corresponding duty of care. Both roles have ethical, legal and professional responsibilities, codes of conduct and moral codes. Both also are roles which have strong cultural images and distinct expectations from individuals and those around them. This can lead to moral dilemmas, moral injury and long-term psychological illness. In the 2024 Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide in Australia, moral injury was cited as a relatively new, but not widely acknowledged, risk factor that may lead to suicide. In the context of defence, moral injury can be described as being experienced by a person who participates in, or witnesses, actions that go against their moral code or moral beliefs.Research designThe research presented is a component of a larger study into the role duality of the Australian Army medic in warzones. It focuses on interviews from twelve currently serving army medics who have deployed overseas in recent conflicts with the research question: How does the intrinsic duality of the role of the medic impact the individual performing this specialised role.Ethical considerationsThis research has ethics approval from both the Australian Defence Human Research Ethics Committee #778-15 and the Human Research Ethics Committee #2015/024. Participants have given formal consent for their reflections to be used in publications.ConclusionFor this research the psychological impact of these ethical conflicts on Australian Army Medics who have served in this dual role has been investigated, with specific focus on moral injury.
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.