The Moral Distress Instrument (MDI): Development, Validation and Associations with Burnout among Finnish Social Workers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moral distress (MD), the suffering experienced by professionals due to their restricted moral agency, has become a popular subject of study in the fields of social work and health care. Many of the existing measures of MD are targeted at certain professionals, such as health care workers, and are thus restricted to such contexts. This has challenged the conceptual development and empirical examination of MD as a phenomenon occurring across diverse professional groups in different work settings. This study introduces a general measure of MD, the Moral Distress Instrument (MDI). It is not bound to specific professional contexts, and it aims to enable comparative and cross-disciplinary analyses of MD. The MDI consists of seven items that capture different forms of constrained moral agency and follow-up items measuring the level of distress related to these experiences. The reliability and validity of the MDI is investigated, and its distinctiveness from and associations with burnout are studied among a sample of Finnish social workers (n = 367). The MDI was shown to be a reliable and valid measure among the sample. The measures of MD and burnout were shown to tap separate constructs, although these experiences were strongly associated with each other.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 it