The moral experiences of pediatric nurses in Brazil: Engagement and relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric nursing care involves many significant ethical challenges. Although nurses are broadly recognized as professionals with relevant knowledge about children and families, little is known about how nurses experience ethical concerns in their everyday practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to better understand the moral experiences and related moral distress experiences of nurses working in pediatric settings in Brazil. DESIGN: Interpretative phenomenological study conducted through narrative interviews. PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: Nine nurses working in three pediatric settings of a teaching hospital in a city of Southern Brazil. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the research site, and research ethics principles were respected throughout the study. FINDINGS: This investigation illuminated a broader dimension of nurses' moral distress, which was recognized as moral experience. In advancing our understanding of nurses' moral experiences, engagement was identified as a central phenomenon that is present in the understandings and actions of nurses within their relationships in their daily practice and lived experiences. Three themes were described with regard to nurses' relationships and their moral experiences: (a) relationship with the healthcare team; (b) relationship with the family; and (c) relationship with the child. DISCUSSION: The findings of this study are congruent with emerging health literature that demonstrated the focus on moral distress as limiting for bioethical inquiry. Moreover, it is important to better understand and recognize nurses' relational environment and engagements to advance understandings of the ethical dimensions of pediatric nursing practice. CONCLUSION: This study provides a better understanding on how engagement affects moral experiences, demonstrating how nurses can experience distress but also satisfaction, gratification, rewarding feelings, and a sense of responsibility for the care they provide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".