ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Moral Injury Beyond Burnout: A Scientometric Review of Clinician Distress and Its Blind Spots in Critical Care.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
backgroundMoral injury is increasingly used to describe clinician distress after perceived moral transgression, forced complicity, or institutional betrayal. Its distinction from burnout and its empirical organisation in healthcare remain insufficiently defined.
methodsWe combined a conceptual review with a document co-citation analysis of moral-injury literature indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection from 1961 to 2026 (20 April 2026). The network comprised 1573 cited references and 5497 co-citation links and was clustered in CiteSpace.
resultsThe network contained ten communities and showed strong structure (modularity Q = 0.73; mean silhouette S = 0.74). Four findings were most relevant to clinical and occupational mental health: the definitional core remains unsettled; healthcare and veteran literatures have developed as partially parallel traditions; measurement and operationalisation papers occupy disproportionately prominent positions in the citation-burst and sigma rankings; and the healthcare instrument that the network identifies as structurally prominent, the Moral Injury Symptom Scale for Healthcare Professionals, retains religious or spiritual elements that require calibration in secular and confessionally heterogeneous settings. Anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine are present in the empirical literature, but as of the search date no specialty-specific work had become an organising reference for the field; citation lag accounts for part of this.
conclusionsMoral injury should not be treated as a synonym for burnout or as a deficit of individual resilience. Future research should specify definitions, validate instruments cross-culturally, stratify by clinical role and specialty and empirically test interventions directed at the moral architecture of work.
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.