ArticleBMC nursing2025
The psychometric properties of the moral distress scale-revised among pediatric nurses.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMoral distress (MD) is a major problem among nurses in all clinical settings. Pediatric nurses are more at risk for MD because of their greater exposure to moral conflicts among their child clients, families, and colleagues. MD can negatively affect nurses' physical and emotional well-being, job satisfaction, and job retention. The Moral Distress Scale-Revised (MDS-R) is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing morally distressful situations. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Persian MDS-R among pediatric nurses.
methodsThis methodological study was carried out between 2024 and 2025. The MDS-R was translated into Persian via the forward‒backward method of the World Health Organization. Facial validity was evaluated through cognitive interviewing, content validity was evaluated on the basis of the comments of experts, and construct validity was evaluated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Data for factor analyses were collected from 447 pediatric nurses selected from a university children's hospital in Tehran, Iran. Reliability was also evaluated via internal consistency and test-retest stability methods.
resultsThe content validity index (CVI) values of all the items were greater than 0.8, and the CVI of the whole scale was 0.92. Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the scale had four factors with an eigenvalue of more than 1. The factors were healthcare providers' limited competency; care provisions under the pressure of personal, organizational, patient-related, and family-related factors; futile care; and lack of moral courage, which explained 53.22% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed the good fit of the four-factor model (Chi-square test value = 366.43 with a degree of freedom of 183 (P < 0.001); CMIN/DF = 2; NFI = 0.90; NNFI = 0.94; PNFI = 0.79; CFI = 0.95; IFI = 0.95; SRMR = 0.072; and AGFI = 0.82). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient and the test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient of the scale were 0.89 and 0.90, respectively.
conclusionThe Persian MDS-R has acceptable validity and reliability and can be used to assess pediatric nurses' MD and develop strategies to reduce it.
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.