ReviewNursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals2025
Social Justice in Nursing: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.
Review in Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals, 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.
- Invisible Hands Behind Clean Hands: Procurement Justice, Materiality, and Nursing Praxis.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026Article
- When the Child Is Not Heard: Children's Rights and Epistemic Injustice in Paediatric Nursing Practice.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026Article
- Social Justice in Nursing: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2025Review
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
While social justice is widely upheld as a foundational value and responsibility within nursing, this concept remains poorly articulated and lacking in a clear and cohesive definition. In particular, prior conceptualizations of social justice within nursing have been critiqued as lacking a strong theoretical foundation and being insufficiently critical in orientation. Resultantly, guidance for nurses in engaging in social justice action is scant, and ultimately, the profession is challenged in truly taking up social justice as a central aim. As such, this critical interpretive synthesis aims to explore and synthesize how social justice is conceptualized within the nursing literature, and apply critical theoretical approaches to re-conceptualize social justice to guide nursing theory, research, and practice. To comprehensively review the literature on social justice (and the related concept of equity) in nursing, CINAHL and Medline (Ovid) databases were searched using nursing, social justice, and equity keywords. Following title/abstract and full text screening of 1428 references, N = 216 were retained for analysis, utilizing critical interpretive synthesis approaches through a critical social theory lens. Through a critical thematic analysis of the nursing literature, this review identifies that concepts of social justice and equity were often conflated in the nursing literature, and that dominant conceptualizations advance notions of social justice as distributive justice and as fairness. Engaging with these dominant conceptualizations through a critical lens illustrates that a re-conceptualization of social justice is necessary to establish conceptual clarity and more meaningfully support nurses in engaging with social justice through theory and practice. As such, this review presents the following re-conceptualized definition of social justice: As a guiding principle for nursing, social justice is a process of recognizing and remediating inequities at individual and structural levels towards a state of equity.
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.