Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41069830›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Moral judgment competence of midwifery students and its influencing factors: a cross-sectional study.

Juan Hu, Min Fan, Hui Ding, Xi Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Juan HuHunan College of Foreign Studies, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Min FanXiang Zhong Normal College for Preschool Education, Shaoyang, Hunan, China.
Hui DingThe Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Xi ChenJoint Research Centre for Primary Health Care and School of Nursing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Midwives frequently encounter complex ethical dilemmas in clinical practice, underscoring the need for strong moral judgment competence. However, limited research has investigated this competence among midwifery students in China. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the level of moral judgment competence among Chinese midwifery students, examine its relationship with empathy, and identify influencing factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 213 midwifery students from three vocational colleges in Hunan Province, China. Data were collected using the Chinese versions of the Moral Judgment Test (MJT) and the Jefferson Scale of Empathy for Nursing Students (JSE-NS), along with demographic information. Statistical analyses included Pearson's correlation and multiple linear regression. Results: The mean MJT score was 11.81 ± 7.48, indicating a moderate level of moral judgment competence. Empathy also reached a moderate level (87.17 ± 12.90), and a significant positive correlation was found between empathy and moral judgment competence ( Conclusion: This study provides the first empirical evidence on moral judgment competence among Chinese midwifery students. The findings highlight the importance of integrating empathy cultivation and ethics education into midwifery training. Targeted, individualized teaching strategies may be effective in enhancing students' ethical reasoning and preparing them for future clinical challenges.

Indexed as

EmpathyJudgmentMidwiferyMoralsStudents, NursingAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adulteducationempathyethicmidwifery studentsmoral judgment competence

Identifiers

PMID41069830
PMCPMC12504240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.