SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
Cognitive Dissonance in Nursing: A Mixed Systematic Review of Its Impact and Coping Strategies.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis mixed-method systematic review synthesised quantitative and qualitative empirical evidence on how cognitive dissonance triggered by care experiences and circumstances affects nurses' well-being, professional behaviour, patient care and on the coping strategies nurses use to manage these experiences.
designFollowing Joanna Briggs Institute guidance, a convergent integrated synthesis approach combined qualitative and quantitative findings. DATA SOURCES: Sixteen studies were included following a comprehensive search across five databases in August 2024.
resultsSixteen studies were included: 12 qualitative, two quantitative and two mixed-methods. Four key themes were identified: (i) dissonance is triggered by conflicting demands, (ii) dissonance discomfort may generate lasting distress, (iii) dissonance influences nursing practice and quality of care and (iv) dissonance reduction efforts varied. Overall, the evidence base was limited in scope and predominantly qualitative, with included studies generally showing moderate to high methodological quality.
conclusionCognitive dissonance is a common but under-recognised challenge in nursing. It arises when actions conflict with professional standards or when nurses are prevented from providing necessary care. If unresolved, it harms nurses' psychological well-being, causing stress, emotional strain and reduced job satisfaction. It may also reduce the quality of care in nursing practice. There is a need for validated measurement tools, longitudinal research exploring long-term impacts and targeted interventions to support nurses. IMPACT: This review is the first to systematically synthesise qualitative and quantitative evidence on cognitive dissonance in nursing. It addresses an important gap by bringing together findings on how dissonance arises in clinical settings, how nurses experience and manage it and its effects on practice and patient care. It also contributes to our understanding of coping strategies nurses use to cope with cognitive dissonance. The findings will support future research, education and interventions aimed at improving care quality and nurse well-being. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public involvement.
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.