MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982926432 · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000002189

Moral Distress of Clinicians in Canadian Pediatric and Neonatal ICUs*

2019· article· en· W2982926432 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen Dryden‐Palmer, Gregory P. Moore, Clare McNeil, Charles Philip Larson, George Tomlinson, Nadia Roumeliotis, Annie Janvier, Christopher S. Parshuram

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity Health NetworkAgricultural Research Institute of OntarioSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeDistressPsychological interventionRespondentIntensive careAttendanceEmergency medicineFamily medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To quantify moral distress in neonatal ICU and PICU clinicians and to identify associated factors. DESIGN: A national cross-sectional survey of clinicians working in an neonatal ICU or PICU. Moral distress was assessed with the Moral Distress Scale-Revised and by self-rating. Depersonalization was assessed on the subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Respondents reported their attendance at each of six hospital supports that may serve to mitigate moral distress in frontline staff. Analyses compared outcomes across respondent characteristics and hierarchical linear regression evaluated individual, ICU, hospital, and regional effects. SETTING: Eligible ICUs were PICUs and level-3 neonatal ICUs in Canada. SUBJECTS: Eligible participants had worked in the participating ICU for more than 3 months. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 54 eligible ICUs from 31 hospitals. Forty-nine Canadian neonatal ICUs and PICUs (91%) contributed 2,852 complete responses for a 45.2% response rate. Most respondents were nurses (64.9%) or from a neonatal ICU (66.5%). The median and interquartile range Moral Distress Scale-Revised were 79 (52-113); 997 respondents (34.2%) had Moral Distress Scale-Revised scores greater than or equal to 100, and 234 respondents (8.3%) strongly agreed that work caused them significant moral distress. Nurses had a median (interquartile range) Moral Distress Scale-Revised score of 85 (57-121), 19 points higher than physicians and 8 points higher than respiratory therapists (p < 0.0001). Moral Distress Scale-Revised scores increased from 53 (35-79) for those working in ICU less than 1 year to 83 (54-120) in those working in ICU more than 30 years (p < 0.0001); 22.5% reported high degrees of depersonalization, which was associated with moral distress (p < 0.0001). Variability in Moral Distress Scale-Revised scores was explained by individual-level (92%), hospital-level (5%), and ICU-level effects (1%). Frequency of participation in potentially mitigating hospital supports had small effects (< 10 points) on mean Moral Distress Scale-Revised scores. CONCLUSIONS: Moral distress is common in clinicians working in ICUs for children. Addressing moral distress will require interventions tailored to individuals in higher-risk groups.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.424 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207