ArticleJournal of nursing management2026
Beyond the Individual: An Ecological Analysis of Workplace Bullying in Aotearoa New Zealand Midwifery.
Article 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study examined how midwives described workplace bullying and the individual, relational, organisational and wider professional or policy conditions associated with their experiences.
backgroundThis exploratory qualitative descriptive study comprised Phase II of a two-phase investigation of workplace bullying among midwives in Aotearoa New Zealand.
methodsSeven practising midwives from varied career stages and practice contexts participated in semistructured online interviews. Two researchers independently coded the transcripts, compared their coding and collaboratively reviewed developing patterns and themes. Data-led analysis generated four process-oriented themes, which were then interpreted using Johnson's Ecological Model of Workplace Bullying.
resultsParticipants described public belittling, professional undermining, exclusion, fear, psychological distress, diminished professional confidence and withdrawal. Four themes were constructed: being diminished and pushed out, hierarchy turns vulnerability into control, organisational silence protects harmful practice and system conditions normalise and isolate. Participants connected these experiences with relational and professional hierarchies, reporting barriers, perceived leadership inaction, workforce pressures, employment arrangements and professional or cultural norms. Cross-level analysis suggested possible connections between interpersonal devaluation, organisational responses and wider workforce and professional conditions.
conclusionsThe findings suggest that workplace bullying may extend beyond interpersonal conflict and be sustained through interacting relational, organisational and structural influences. This contextually grounded study identifies potential intervention points across ecological levels without claiming prevalence, causation or effects on patient safety across the wider midwifery workforce. Larger and more diverse studies incorporating organisational and regulatory perspectives are needed to examine these pathways and evaluate multilevel interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Responses should extend beyond individual coping and support to address relational conduct, organisational accountability and wider professional conditions. For nursing management, recognising bullying as more than an interpersonal problem requires considering how leadership responses, reporting processes, workforce pressures, employment arrangements and professional hierarchies may shape workplace experiences. These remain candidate areas for further evaluation.
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.