The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Power imbalance between nurses and patients: a potential inhibitor of partnership in care
Abstract
Summary: • The Patient's Charter identifies the need for nurses to respect patients' rights to influence their care, and contemporary nursing practice advocates that nurses work in partnership with patients. Hence nurses are encouraged to share their power and facilitate empowerment in their patients by giving them information and support. • However, the literature indicates that nurses are not very successful in making patients feel empowered to make informed decisions. This study, conducted in 1998, provides some answers as to why this may be the case. • The aim of the study was to explore and describe nurses' and patients' views regarding partnership in care in hospital. • Using the grounded theory approach, participants were drawn from four hospitals in Western Australia. A purposive sample of 33 nurses and 32 patients were interviewed in‐depth. Participant observation was also conducted and field notes were written. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using the constant comparative method. • The findings showed that nurses viewed involving patients in care as requiring them to give patients information and to share their decision‐making powers with them. With the exception of a few, the majority of nurses were unwilling to share their decision‐making powers. • This created a situation of power imbalance with subsequent little patient input. Factors identified included nurses' beliefs that they ‘know best’, the view that patients lacked medical knowledge and the perceived need for nurses to hold onto their power and maintain control. • If nurses and patients are to work as partners, it is important that nurses make every effort to equalize the power imbalance. One way to do this is for nurses to share and give information to patients readily and to be open in their communication with them.
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
The problem of rigor in qualitative research
Sandelowski, M. (1986) · Advances in Nursing Science · doi:10.1097/00012272-198604000-00005 · Cited by 2,772
Cited by
Impact of Nurse-Patient Relationship on Quality of Care and Patient Autonomy in Decision-Making
Molina-Mula, J., & Gallo-Estrada, J. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17030835 · Cited by 403
Smebye, K. L., Kirkevold, M., & Engedal, K. (2012) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-241 · Cited by 186
Patients’ perspectives on person-centred participation in healthcare: A framework analysis
Thórarinsdóttir, K., & Kristjánsson, K. (2014) · Nursing Ethics · doi:10.1177/0969733013490593 · Cited by 132
Townsend, A., Leese, J., Adam, P., McDonald, M., Li, L. C., Kerr, S., & Backman, C. L. (2015) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.3792 · Cited by 106
Timmers, T., Janssen, L., Pronk, Y., van der Zwaard, B. C., Koëter, S., van Oostveen, D., de Boer, S., Kremers, K., Rutten, S., Das, D., et al. (2018) · JMIR mHealth and uHealth · doi:10.2196/10742 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Henderson, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-06-06
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 501-508
- ISSN
- 0962-1067 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2702
- OpenAlex
- W2170572063
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.91
- 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: Power imbalance between nurses and patients: a potential inhibitor of partnership in care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00757.x
- The paper
- Henderson, S. (2003). Power imbalance between nurses and patients: a potential inhibitor of partnership in care. Journal of Clinical Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00757.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.