The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Preserving moral integrity: a follow‐up study with new graduate nurses
Abstract
Preserving moral integrity: a follow‐up study with new graduate nurses¶The purpose of this follow‐up study was to describe, explain and interpret how new graduate nurses perceived their adaptation to the ‘real world’ of hospital nursing and what they perceived as major influences on their moral values and ethical roles in the 2 years following graduation. The method was qualitative, specifically grounded theory. The earlier study took place when informants were senior nursing students. The follow‐up study began after the informants had been practising for 1 year. Research questions guiding the study were: How do new graduate nurses describe their adaptation to the ‘real world’ of hospital nursing? What do they describe as factors influencing their moral values and ethical roles in hospital nursing? Preserving moral integrity was the basic psycho‐social process that explained how these new graduate nurses adapted to the real world of hospital nursing. Six stages of this process were identified: vulnerability; getting through the day; coping with moral distress; alienation from self; coping with lost ideals; and integration of new professional self‐concept. Moral distress was a consequence of the effort to preserve moral integrity. It is the result of believing that one is not living up to one’s moral convictions. Data supported that the most pervasive attributes of moral distress were self‐criticism and self‐blame, as informants judged their actions against their moral convictions and their standards of what a good nurse would do. Moral distress was an acute form of psychological disorientation in which informants questioned their professional knowledge, what kind of nurses they were and what kind of nurses they were becoming. Theoretical explanations of these findings are grounded in social interaction and moral psychology theories.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Moral Distress in Nursing Practice: Experience and Effect
Wilkinson, J. M. (1987) · Nursing Forum · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6198.1987.tb00794.x · Cited by 521
Moral Reasoning and Moral Behavior Among Selected Groups of Practicing Nurses
KETEFIAN, S. (1981) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-198105000-00011 · Cited by 112
Cited by
Nurse Moral Distress: a proposed theory and research agenda
Corley, M. C. (2002) · Nursing Ethics · doi:10.1191/0969733002ne557oa · Cited by 735
Nurse Moral Distress and Ethical Work Environment
Corley, M. C., Minick, P., Elswick, R. K., & Jacobs, M. (2005) · Nursing Ethics · doi:10.1191/0969733005ne809oa · Cited by 593
Belongingness: A prerequisite for nursing students’ clinical learning
Levett-Jones, T., & Lathlean, J. (2008) · Nurse Education in Practice · doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2007.04.003 · Cited by 438
Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end‐of‐life decisions
Oberle, K., & Hughes, D. (2001) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01710.x · Cited by 375
McCarthy, J., & Deady, R. (2008) · Nursing Ethics · doi:10.1177/0969733007086023 · Cited by 366
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelly, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-11
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1134-1145
- ISSN
- 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2648
- OpenAlex
- W2055891540
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Preserving moral integrity: a follow‐up study with new graduate nurses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00810.x
- The paper
- Kelly, B. (1998). Preserving moral integrity: a follow‐up study with new graduate nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00810.x
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.