Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identifying Moral Injury in Healthcare Professionals: The Moral Injury Symptom Scale-HP

Open access
Mantri, Sneha, Lawson, Jennifer Mah, Wang, ZhiZhong, Koenig, Harold G.·2020·Journal of Religion and Health

Abstract

This study aims to develop and assess the psychometric properties of a measure of moral injury (MI) symptoms for identifying clinically significant MI in health professionals (HPs), one that might be useful in the current COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. A total of 181 HPs (71% physicians) were recruited from Duke University Health Systems in Durham, North Carolina. Internal reliability of the Moral Injury Symptom Scale-Healthcare Professionals version (MISS-HP) was examined, along with factor analytic, discriminant, and convergent validity. A cutoff score was identified from a receiver operator curve (ROC) that best identified individuals with significant impairment in social or occupational functioning. The 10-item MISS-HP measures 10 theoretically grounded dimensions of MI assessing betrayal, guilt, shame, moral concerns, religious struggle, loss of religious/spiritual faith, loss of meaning/purpose, difficulty forgiving, loss of trust, and self-condemnation (score range 10–100). Internal reliability of the MISS-HP was 0.75. PCA identified three factors, which was confirmed by CFA, explaining 56.8% of the variance. Discriminant validity was demonstrated by modest correlations (r’s = 0.25–0.37) with low religiosity, depression, and anxiety symptoms, whereas convergent validity was evident by strong correlations with clinician burnout (r = 0.57) and with another multi-item measure of MI symptoms (r = 0.65). ROC characteristics indicated that a score of 36 or higher was 84% sensitive and 93% specific for identifying MI symptoms causing moderate to extreme problems with family, social, and occupational functioning. The MISS-HP is a reliable and valid measure of moral injury symptoms in health professionals that can be used in clinical practice to screen for MI and monitor response to treatment, as well as when conducting research that evaluates interventions to treat MI in HPs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10943-020-01065-w

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Mantri, S., Lawson, J. M., Wang, Z., & Koenig, H. G.
Venue
Journal of Religion and Health
Published
2020-07-17
Volume
59
Issue
5
Pages
2323-2340
ISSN
  • 0022-4197 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6571
OpenAlex
W3043061812
Cited by
316
References
52
FWCI
39.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Identifying Moral Injury in Healthcare Professionals: The Moral Injury Symptom Scale-HP. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10943-020-01065-w
The paper
Mantri, S., Lawson, J. M., Wang, Z., & Koenig, H. G. (2020). Identifying Moral Injury in Healthcare Professionals: The Moral Injury Symptom Scale-HP. Journal of Religion and Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-020-01065-w

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.