Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 375

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end‐of‐life decisions

Oberle, Kathleen, Hughes, Dorothy·2001·Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract

Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end‐of‐life decisions Aims. To identify and compare doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems. Rationale. Ethical problems are a source of tension for health professionals. Misunderstandings or conflicts may result from differing perceptions of ethical problems. If true collaboration is to be achieved, it is important to understand the perspectives of others, particularly when difficult end‐of‐life decisions must be made. Methods. In this qualitative study a total of seven doctors and 14 nurses working in acute care adult medical‐surgical areas, including intensive care, were asked to describe ethical problems that they frequently encounter in practice. Interviews were taped and transcribed. Thematic analysis followed. Results. All participants experienced ethical problems around decision making at the end of life. The core problem for both doctors and nurses was witnessing suffering, which engendered a moral obligation to reduce that suffering. Uncertainty about the best course of action for the patient and family was a source of moral distress. Competing values, hierarchical processes, scarce resources, and communication emerged as common themes. The key difference between the groups was that doctors are responsible for making decisions and nurses must live with these decisions. Each group, therefore, asked different questions when encountering and interpreting sources of moral distress. Conclusions. It was concluded that observed differences between doctors and nurses were a function of the professional role played by each rather than differences in ethical reasoning or moral motivation. Although this was a small qualitative study on one institution, and may not be generalizable, results suggest that doctors and nurses need to engage in moral discourse to understand and support the ethical burden carried by the other. Administrators should provide opportunities for discourse to help staff reduce moral distress and generate creative strategies for dealing with this.

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01710.x

Cites

25 of 25 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 25 references

Cited by

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Oberle, K., & Hughes, D.
Venue
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-03-16
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
707-715
ISSN
  • 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2648
OpenAlex
W2041213350
Cited by
375
References
25
FWCI
13.16
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: Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end‐of‐life decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01710.x
The paper
Oberle, K., & Hughes, D. (2001). Doctors’ and nurses’ perceptions of ethical problems in end‐of‐life decisions. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01710.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.