Prevalence and Risk Factors for Moral Distress in Pediatric Oncology Health Care Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Moral distress (MoD) is prevalent among health care professionals (HCPs) in oncology and is associated with burnout. The objectives of this study were to quantify MoD among pediatric oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs) at a Canadian quaternary care hospital, identify root causes, and evaluate change over time. METHODS Eligible pediatric oncology HCPs were identified, and consenting participants completed the Measure of Moral Distress-Healthcare Professionals (MMD-HP) and MoD Thermometer (MDT) at baseline, followed by biweekly MDTs over 12 weeks. RESULTS A total of 139 HCPs participated. The mean MMD-HP score was 123 ± 57.0, range 9-288. Demographic risk factors identified for elevated MMD-HP scores were female sex (female 127.1 and male 83.6, P = .01) and nursing role (nurse 136.3 and most responsible physician 85.3, P = .02). Higher MMD-HP scores were found in HCPs who were currently considering resigning because of MoD compared with those who were not (169.9 v 115.4, P < .001). Situations involving administration of treatment to children with poor prognosis cancers that was perceived to be overly aggressive were ranked as the greatest environmental contributor to MoD. Baseline and mean MDT scores over time strongly correlated with MMD-HP scores ( P < .0001 and P = .0003, respectively), with mean MDT scores showing no significant fluctuation over the 12-week period. CONCLUSION MoD was common among pediatric oncology HCPs. Risk factors for elevated levels of MoD included both demographic and environmental factors. Implementation of systems to improve team communication and decision making, especially in the care of patients with poor prognosis cancers, may affect HCP MoD.
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 | 0.017 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".