SynthesisInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2026
Between duty and constraint: a qualitative systematic review of healthcare providers' ethical challenges and moral stressors in caring for undocumented migrants.
Synthesis in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 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
purposeHealthcare providers play a critical role in delivering care to undocumented migrants, who face systemic barriers to healthcare access. While research has documented undocumented migrants' legal and policy barriers, less is known about the ethical challenges and moral stressors experienced by providers. This systematic review synthesizes qualitative studies on providers' experiences when delivering care to undocumented migrants.
methodsThe review followed PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant qualitative studies. Studies were screened by title, abstract, and full text using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality assessment was conducted using the CASP checklist. Data were synthesized using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL), integrating Graneheim and Lundman's approach to qualitative content analysis.
resultsThe systematic search identified 37 qualitative studies. Analysis revealed 58 themes and subthemes, organized under five key concepts: experiences, perceptions, attitudes, practices and coping mechanisms, and ethical challenges. Providers reported moral distress, emotional exhaustion, and professional dilemmas arising from legal constraints, resource limitations, and conflicting obligations. Ethical tensions centered on beneficence vs. non-maleficence, professional duty vs. legal compliance, and the moral dilemma of deservingness. Across these findings, the synthesis identifies ethical burden-shifting as a central analytical contribution: restrictive systems transfer the moral and practical consequences of exclusionary arrangements onto providers and undocumented migrants at the point of care.
conclusionThis review shows that providers' ethical challenges are not only individual clinical dilemmas but structurally generated moral stressors. Addressing these challenges requires structural interventions, including policy reforms that reconcile professional ethics with legal constraints and institutional support to mitigate moral distress.
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.