Cited by 151Ethics in medical practiceEthics in Business and EducationHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues

Effects of ethics education on moral sensitivity of nursing students

Yeom, Hye-A, Ahn, Sung-Hee, Kim, Su-Jeong·2017·Nursing Ethics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While nursing ethics education is commonly provided for undergraduate nursing students in most nursing colleges, consensus on the content and teaching modules for these ethics courses have still not been established. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the effects of nursing ethics education on the moral sensitivity and critical thinking disposition of nursing students in Korea. RESEARCH DESIGN: A one-group pre- and post-test design was used. Moral sensitivity was measured using the Korean version of the Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire. Critical thinking disposition was measured using the Critical Thinking Disposition Questionnaire. Participants and research context: Participants were 70 undergraduate nursing students who were attending a university located in Seoul, Korea. The nursing ethics education was provided 7 times, from September to December 2010, and comprised 90-min sessions each week. Ethical considerations: This study was conducted in accordance with the Human Subject Research Ethics Committee guidelines. FINDINGS: After the education, the levels for the patient-oriented care, a sub-domain of moral sensitivity, and inquisitiveness, a sub-domain of critical thinking disposition, significantly improved. There were no changes in overall scores for moral sensitivity and critical thinking disposition. There were significant positive correlations between moral sensitivity and critical thinking disposition both pre- and post-intervention. CONCLUSION: These results reflect the need for ongoing efforts to develop innovative content, structure, and instructional methods for undergraduate nursing ethics education programs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0969733015622060

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yeom, H.-A., Ahn, S.-H., & Kim, S.-J.
Affiliations
  • Catholic University of Korea (KR)
  • University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
Corresponding author
Ahn, Sung-Hee
Venue
Nursing Ethics
Published
2016-01-24
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
644-652
ISSN
  • 0969-7330 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0989
OpenAlex
W2283800398
Cited by
151
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
9.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nursing Ethics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Creighton University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Keywords
nursing ethics education, moral sensitivity, critical thinking disposition, nursing students, patient-centered care, inquisitiveness, ethics education, Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire
MeSH terms
Adult, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Ethics, Nursing, Female, Humans, Morals, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Nursing, Thinking, Universities, Republic of Korea

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