SynthesisJournal of nursing management2026
Quiet Quitting and Associated Factors Among Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of nursing management, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuiet quitting (QQ), the voluntary reduction of discretionary effort while maintaining minimum job requirements, has become a pressing concern in healthcare. Understanding its prevalence and drivers is essential for sustaining workforce well-being. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled mean of QQ among healthcare professionals (HCPs) and identify associated factors.
methodsThis systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines by searching in three international databases including Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed from 2020 to 2026. Quantitative data were synthesized using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were performed based on geography, professional role, and healthcare setting. Factors associated with QQ were categorized using the expanded Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) framework.
resultsThirty-one studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with 25 studies (n = 14,508 HCPs) included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean QQ score was 2.49 (95% CI: 2.37-2.61), with significant heterogeneity (I
conclusionThe findings suggest that QQ is an emerging and multifactorial phenomenon among HCPs, influenced primarily by structural and relational workplace factors. However, given the substantial heterogeneity, limited geographical representation, and variability in measurement approaches across studies, the pooled findings should be interpreted cautiously. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Healthcare organizations should prioritize "relational" resources over extrinsic rewards. Monitoring early signs of disengagement and implementing transformational leadership models can help prevent the escalation of QQ into burnout or turnover, thereby sustaining high-quality patient care.
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.