A comparative study of nursing attitudes towards young male survivors of brain injury: A questionnaire survey
Abstract
Background The attitudes members of the nursing profession hold towards survivors of brain injury may impact on the level of help, and degree of involvement they are willing to have. Given that the manner in which an individual receives their brain injury has been shown to impact on public prejudices, the importance of exploring nursing attitudes to this vulnerable group, and the subsequent impact this may have on the caring role, requires investigation. Objective To investigate the attitudes held by members of the nursing profession towards young male survivors of brain injury whose behaviour either contributed, or did not contribute, to their injury. Design Independent groups design. Setting and participants Ninety trainee and sixty-nine qualified nurses respectively drawn from a university in the south west of England and the emergency, orthopaedic and paediatric Departments of the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, UK. Methods Participants were randomly assigned to one of four fictional brain injury scenarios. A young male character was portrayed as sustaining a brain injury as a result of either an aneurysm, or through drug taking, with their behaviour being either a contributory or non-contributory factor. On reading these, participants were asked to complete the prejudicial evaluation scale, the social interaction scale and the helping behaviour scale. Results Analysis of variance showed that qualified nurses held more prejudicial attitudes than student nurses towards su…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Linden 2011 found more negative attitudes as measured across subjects against individuals seen as contributing towards their injury.
“More negative attitudes as measured across subjects were found against individuals seen as contributing towards their injury.”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [58]
Two British studies examine bias against brain-injured patients who are perceived as having contributed to their injury, and two Australian studies looked at bias against intravenous drug users.
“two British studies examine bias against brain-injured patients who are perceived as having contributed to their injury [58, 59], and two Australian studies looked at bias against intravenous drug users [48, 49]”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [58]
Nursing students were less prejudiced, more willing to help and desired more social interaction with patients with brain injury, when compared with qualified nurses.
“Another study demonstrated that nursing students were less prejudiced, more willing to help and desired more social interaction with patients with brain injury, when compared with qualified nurses [58].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [58]
Cites
An Attribution Model of Public Discrimination Towards Persons with Mental Illness
Corrigan, P., Markowitz, F. E., Watson, A., Rowan, D., & Kubiak, M. A. (2003) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/1519806 · Cited by 1,407 · see citing works
Mackay, N., & Barrowclough, C. (2005) · British Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466505x29620 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review
FitzGerald, C., & Hurst, S. (2017) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-017-0179-8 · Cited by 2,398 · see citing works
- Authors
- Linden, M. A., & Redpath, S. J.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Morriston Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Linden, Mark A.
- ORCID
- Linden, Mark A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Nursing Studies
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-01
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 62-69
- ISSN
- 0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2060686282
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- nursing attitudes, brain injury, prejudice, contributing factors, blame, helping behavior, social interaction, trainee nurses, qualified nurses, aneurysm, drug use, caregiver role
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attitude of Health Personnel, Brain Injuries, Intracranial Aneurysm, Empathy, England, Female, Helping Behavior, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nurse-Patient Relations, Nursing Staff, Hospital, Prejudice, Risk-Taking, Students, Nursing, Nursing Methodology Research, Survivors, Substance-Related Disorders, Young Adult
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