SynthesisBMC medical ethics2025
Psychometric properties of instruments measuring ethical climate among healthcare professionals in care settings pre-pandemic: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ethical climate in healthcare is part of the work environment and a basis for professional nursing practice. The ethical climate is crucial as it is closely associated with staff job satisfaction, the quality-of-care provision, and nurses' intention to stay in their current occupation and position. Even though several instruments assessing ethical climate in healthcare have been developed over the years, their psychometric properties have not been systematically reviewed.
objectivesThis study was conducted to identify and critically appraise the psychometric properties of instruments used to measure the ethical climate among healthcare professionals in care settings prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsA systematic review was performed, covering papers published between 1994 and 2019, excluding grey literature sources. The literature search was performed in October 2019 in Cinahl, PsychINFO, PubMed, and SocIndex. Empirical studies were included describing the psychometric properties of instruments measuring the ethical climate among healthcare professionals in healthcare settings. Data on psychometric properties were extracted and a quality assessment was performed following the quality criteria for measurement properties proposed by Terwee et al. criteria 2007.
resultOur search yielded 15,150 publications. After title and abstract screening, 611 studies were retained for full-text analysis, of which eight studies describing five instruments were included (five instrument development studies and three translation studies). Four studies concerned the Hospital Environment Climate Scale (HECS). All instruments had been assessed for content validity and internal consistency. Information concerning criterion validity, construct validity, and reproducibility was lacking or intermediate. No information concerning floor/ceiling effect or interpretability was reported in most cases. One study reported having performed a test-retest analysis. None of the included studies fulfilled all the Terwee et al. criteria.
conclusionFive instruments were identified as having undergone psychometric testing; however, none fulfilled all the criteria outlined by Terwee et al. Also, only one of the instruments had been subjected to the well-established test-retest analysis. This highlights a need for further well-structured validation studies of instruments assessing the ethical climate among healthcare professionals in care settings.
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.