ArticleInternational nursing review2026
Perfectionism Profiles Among Hospital Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Validation Study of a Multidimensional Scale.
Article in International nursing review, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo adapt and validate the Multidimensional Inventory of Perfectionism for hospital nurses, identify distinct perfectionism profiles, and examine associated factors and outcomes.
backgroundPerfectionism in nursing, shaped by both internal standards and diverse external pressures, requires a multidimensional, context-sensitive assessment to identify nurses at risk for poor health and lower perceptions of patient safety.
methodsThis descriptive cross-sectional study used expert review to assess content validity and a survey of hospital nurses to test construct validity and reliability. Latent profile analysis identified subgroups, and regression models examined associations with personal and work factors, emotional distress, and self-perceived patient safety.
resultsThe adapted scale showed strong validity and high internal consistency. Four latent profiles emerged: Nonperfectionism, Self-Oriented Perfectionism, Externally Pressured Nonperfectionism, and High-Pressure Perfectionism. Profile membership was related to gender, nursing experience, staffing adequacy, and pandemic-related patient care. Compared with Nonperfectionism, all three profiles involving perfectionistic tendencies or external pressure were associated with greater emotional distress. Externally Pressured Nonperfectionism and High-Pressure Perfectionism were also associated with less favorable self-perceived patient safety, with High-Pressure Perfectionism showing a particularly adverse pattern. DISCUSSION: The adapted measure effectively captured internal dimensions and source-specific external pressures of nurse perfectionism. Profiles differed meaningfully in risks for emotional well-being and safety perceptions.
conclusionThe study findings support healthcare organizations, nurse leaders, and policymakers in developing targeted interventions to safeguard nurses' well-being and optimize patient care. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurse leaders should address high-pressure perfectionism through unit-level staffing review, supportive feedback, and just culture-based error review. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Health policy should support minimum nurse-to-patient ratios and non-punitive incident reporting systems to reduce harmful perfectionistic pressures and support sustainable nursing practice.
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.