Log in using your username and password

  • Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
  • Latest content
  • Current issue
  • Write for Us
  • BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

You are here

  • Volume 22, Issue 2
  • Integration of a theoretical framework into your research study
  • Article Text
  • Article info
  • Citation Tools
  • Rapid Responses
  • Article metrics

Download PDF

  • Roberta Heale 1 ,
  • Helen Noble 2
  • 1 Laurentian University , School of Nursing , Sudbury , Ontario , Canada
  • 2 Queens University Belfast , School of Nursing and Midwifery , Belfast , UK
  • Correspondence to Dr Roberta Heale, School of Nursing, Laurentian University, Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, P3E2C6, Canada; rheale{at}laurentian.ca


Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Often the most difficult part of a research study is preparing the proposal based around a theoretical or philosophical framework. Graduate students ‘…express confusion, a lack of knowledge, and frustration with the challenge of choosing a theoretical framework and understanding how to apply it’. 1 However, the importance in understanding and applying a theoretical framework in research cannot be overestimated.

The choice of a theoretical framework for a research study is often a reflection of the researcher’s ontological (nature of being) and epistemological (theory of knowledge) perspective. We will not delve into these concepts, or personal philosophy in this article. Rather we will focus on how a theoretical framework can be integrated into research.

The theoretical framework is a blueprint for your research project 1 and serves several purposes. It informs the problem you have identified, the purpose and significance of your research demonstrating how your research fits with what is already known (relationship to existing theory and research). This provides a basis for your research questions, the literature review and the methodology and analysis that you choose. 1 Evidence of your chosen theoretical framework should be visible in every aspect of your research and should demonstrate the contribution of this research to knowledge. 2

What is a theory?

A theory is an explanation of a concept or an abstract idea of a phenomenon. An example of a theory is Bandura’s middle range theory of self-efficacy, 3 or the level of confidence one has in achieving a goal. Self-efficacy determines the coping behaviours that a person will exhibit when facing obstacles. Those who have high self-efficacy are likely to apply adequate effort leading to successful outcomes, while those with low self-efficacy are more likely to give up earlier and ultimately fail. Any research that is exploring concepts related to self-efficacy or the ability to manage difficult life situations might apply Bandura’s theoretical framework to their study.

Using a theoretical framework in a research study

Example 1: the big five theoretical framework.

The first example includes research which integrates the ‘Big Five’, a theoretical framework that includes concepts related to teamwork. These include team leadership, mutual performance monitoring, backup behaviour, adaptability and team orientation. 4 In order to conduct research incorporating a theoretical framework, the concepts need to be defined according to a frame of reference. This provides a means to understand the theoretical framework as it relates to a specific context and provides a mechanism for measurement of the concepts.

In this example, the concepts of the Big Five were given a conceptual definition, that provided a broad meaning and then an operational definition, which was more concrete. 4 From here, a survey was developed that reflected the operational definitions related to teamwork in nursing: the Nursing Teamwork Survey (NTS). 5 In this case, the concepts used in the theoretical framework, the Big Five, were the used to develop a survey specific to teamwork in nursing.

The NTS was used in research of nurses at one hospital in northeastern Ontario. Survey questions were grouped into subscales for analysis, that reflected the concepts of the Big Five. 6 For example, one finding of this study was that the nurses from the surgical unit rated the items in the subscale of ’team leadership' (one of the concepts in the Big Five) significantly lower than in the other units. The researchers looked back to the definition of this concept in the Big Five in their interpretation of the findings. Since the definition included a person(s) who has the leadership skills to facilitate teamwork among the nurses on the unit, the conclusion in this study was that the surgical unit lacked a mentor, or facilitator for teamwork. In this way, the theory of teamwork was presented through a set of concepts in a theoretical framework. The Theoretical Framework (TF)was the foundation for development of a survey related to a specific context, used to measure each of the concepts within the TF. Then, the analysis and results circled back to the concepts within the TF and provided a guide for the discussion and conclusions arising from the research.

Example 2: the Health Decisions Model

In another study which explored adherence to intravenous chemotherapy in African-American and Caucasian Women with early stage breast cancer, an adapted version of the Health Decisions Model (HDM) was used as the theoretical basis for the study. 7 The HDM, a revised version of the Health Belief Model, incorporates some aspects of the Health Belief Model and factors relating to patient preferences. 8 The HDM consists of six interrelated constituents that might predict how well a person adheres to a health decision. These include sociodemographic, social interaction, experience, knowledge, general and specific health beliefs and patient preferences, and are clearly defined. The HDM model was used to explore factors which might influence adherence to chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Sociodemographic, social interaction, knowledge, personal experience and specific health beliefs were used as predictors of adherence to chemotherapy.

The findings were reported using the theoretical framework to discuss results. The study found that delay to treatment, health insurance, depression and symptom severity were predictors to starting chemotherapy which could potentially be adapted with clinical interventions. The findings from the study contribute to the existing body of literature related to cancer nursing.

Example 3: the nursing role effectiveness model

In this final example, research was conducted to determine the nursing processes that were associated with unexpected intensive care unit admissions. 9 The framework was the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model. In this theoretical framework, the concepts within Donabedian’s Quality Framework of Structure, Process and Outcome were each defined according to nursing practice. 10 11  Processes defined in the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model were used to identify the nursing process variables that were measured in the study.

A theoretical framework should be logically presented and represent the concepts, variables and relationships related to your research study, in order to clearly identify what will be examined, described or measured. It involves reading the literature and identifying a research question(s) while clearly defining and identifying the existing relationship between concepts and theories (related to your research questions[s] in the literature). You must then identify what you will examine or explore in relation to the concepts of the theoretical framework. Once you present your findings using the theoretical framework you will be able to articulate how your study relates to and may potentially advance your chosen theory and add to knowledge.

  • Kalisch BJ ,
  • Parent M , et al
  • Strickland OL ,
  • Dalton JA , et al
  • Eraker SA ,
  • Kirscht JP ,
  • Lightfoot N , et al
  • Harrison MB ,
  • Laschinger H , et al

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Patient and public involvement Not required.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Who uses nursing theory? A univariate descriptive analysis of five years' research articles


  • 1 Nursing PhD Program, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. [email protected]
  • PMID: 20950408
  • DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2010.00835.x

Background: Since the early 1950s, nursing leaders have worked diligently to build the Scientific Discipline of Nursing, integrating Theory, Research and Practice. Recently, the role of theory has again come into question, with some scientists claiming nurses are not using theory to guide their research, with which to improve practice.

Aims: The purposes of this descriptive study were to determine: (i) Were nursing scientists' research articles in leading nursing journals based on theory? (ii) If so, were the theories nursing theories or borrowed theories? (iii) Were the theories integrated into the studies, or were they used as organizing frameworks?

Methods: Research articles from seven top ISI journals were analysed, excluding regularly featured columns, meta-analyses, secondary analysis, case studies and literature reviews. The authors used King's dynamic Interacting system and Goal Attainment Theory as an organizing framework. They developed consensus on how to identify the integration of theory, searching the Title, Abstract, Aims, Methods, Discussion and Conclusion sections of each research article, whether quantitative or qualitative.

Results: Of 2857 articles published in the seven journals from 2002 to, and including, 2006, 2184 (76%) were research articles. Of the 837 (38%) authors who used theories, 460 (55%) used nursing theories, 377 (45%) used other theories: 776 (93%) of those who used theory integrated it into their studies, including qualitative studies, while 51 (7%) reported they used theory as an organizing framework for their studies. Closer analysis revealed theory principles were implicitly implied, even in research reports that did not explicitly report theory usage.

Conclusions: Increasing numbers of nursing research articles (though not percentagewise) continue to be guided by theory, and not always by nursing theory. Newer nursing research methods may not explicitly state the use of nursing theory, though it is implicitly implied.

© 2010 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences © 2010 Nordic College of Caring Science.

  • Nursing Research
  • Nursing Theory*
  • Open access
  • Published: 19 March 2024

Unfinished nursing care in healthcare settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

  • Aysun Bayram   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2038-6265 1 ,
  • Stefania Chiappinotto   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4829-1831 2 &
  • Alvisa Palese   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3508-844X 2  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  352 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Unfinished nursing care is becoming increasingly more of a concern in worldwide healthcare settings. Given their negative outcomes, it is crucial to continuously assess those nursing interventions that are commonly postponed or missed, as well as the underlying reasons and consequences. The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has made it difficult for health facilities to maintain their sustainability and continuity of care, which has also influenced the unfinished nursing care phenomenon. However, no summary of the studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic was produced up to now. The main aim of this study was to systematically review the occurrence of, reasons for, and consequences of unfinished nursing care among patients in healthcare settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Systematic review registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023422871). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guideline and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies were used. MEDLINE-PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Scopus were searched from March 2020 up to May 2023, using keywords established in the field as missed care, unfinished nursing care, or implicit rationing.

Twenty-five studies conducted mainly in European and Asiatic countries were included and assessed as possessing good methodological quality. The following tools were used: the MISSCARE Survey (= 14); the Basel Extent of Rationing of Nursing Care (= 1), also in its revised form (= 2) and regarding nursing homes (= 2); the Perceived Implicit Rationing of Nursing Care (= 4); the Intensive Care Unit-Omitted Nursing Care (= 1); and the Unfinished Nursing Care Survey (= 1). The order of unfinished nursing care interventions that emerged across studies for some countries is substantially in line with pre-pandemic data (e.g., oral care, ambulation). However, some interesting variations emerged at the country and inter-country levels. Conversely, labour resources and reasons close to the emotional state and well-being of nurses were mentioned homogeneously as most affecting unfinished nursing care during the pandemic. None of the studies investigated the consequences of unfinished nursing care.


Two continents led the research in this field during the pandemic: Europe, where this research was already well established, and Asia, where this research is substantially new. While unfinished care occurrence seems to be based on pre-established patterns across Europe (e.g., regarding fundamentals needs), new patterns emerged across Asiatic countries. Among the reasons, homogeneity in the findings emerged all in line with those documented in the pre-pandemic era.

Peer Review reports

Unfinished nursing care (UNC), which is becoming increasingly more of a concern in worldwide healthcare settings, involves the skipped, delayed, or incomplete delivery of nursing interventions needed for the patient and/or the patient’s family [ 1 , 2 ]. The prevalence of UNC, which ranges from 55 to 98% globally [ 1 ], is considered as an accurate indicator of both patient safety and nursing care quality [ 3 , 4 ]. The primary reasons for UNC are issues in communication, labour, and material resources [ 5 ]. The occurrence of UNC has also been associated with staff shortage and factors at both the structural level (e.g., nurses’ roles and experiences) and the process level, such as the stressful work environment, some negative managerial practices, the amount of overtime, and the high and/or complex demand for patient care [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. In terms of consequences, UNC is linked to poor patient (e.g., pressure sores), nurse (e.g., moral distress), and organisational outcomes (e.g., increased length of stay) [ 5 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. Given these unfavourable outcomes, it is crucial to continuously assess those nursing interventions that are commonly postponed or missed, as well as the underlying reasons and consequences, to inform evidence-based strategies aimed at decreasing the frequency of UNC.

The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic has made it difficult for health facilities to maintain their sustainability and continuity of care due to the dramatic call to increase the care capacity with limited resources [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]. The staff sector most impacted by the pandemic — especially due to concerns regarding infection — has been recognised as nursing staff delivering direct patient care and thus representing the most crucial element of the health system infrastructure [ 18 ]. In addition to the need to increase the amount of care, nurses have also been impacted by unfamiliar work settings due to changes in the layout of the hospitals, sickness exposure, and urgent deployment from one department to another without the required skills. Therefore, various components (e.g., communication) of nursing care have been compromised by the limited interaction required during the pandemic and the need to be distanced. Nurses’ care capacity has also been negatively impacted by feelings related to the pandemic triggering anxiety, depression, and burnout [ 19 , 20 ]. A rise in the number of nurses layoffs, the increased shortage of nurses, poor working circumstances, negative feelings, and imbalances in the nurse–patient ratio may all have increased the occurrence of UNC during the pandemic [ 21 , 22 ] by further eroding the quality of care [ 23 , 24 ]. Gurkovà et al. [ 25 ] stated that UNC may have increased the risk and adverse effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in ethical issues and a widespread mistrust in health systems [ 26 ]; moreover, Nash et al. [ 27 ] also stated that healthcare disparities were the consequences of UNC.

However, while the pre-pandemic occurrence of UNC has been well established, with several primary studies and systematic reviews (e.g., [ 28 ]) also investigating the underlying reasons (e.g., [ 29 ]), no summary of the studies conducted during the pandemic has been provided to date. Summarising the evidence produced may highlight the issues experienced during the pandemic in order to prevent them in future epidemiological disasters. It may also provide information on the quality of care in dramatic circumstances and the variations, if any, in the routine care before the pandemic. Finally, it may also set a new baseline in the context of UNC given the profound disruption and changes affecting the healthcare systems, requiring a long-term recovery. Thus, the aim of this review was to systematically review the occurrence of, reasons for, and consequences of UNC among patients in healthcare settings in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic.

To begin with, two researchers (AB, SC) performed a rapid literature search to establish whether any studies had been published on UNC occurrences, their reasons, and consequences among patients during the pandemic. The beginning of the pandemic period was defined as 11 March 2020, according to the declaration by the World Health Organisation [ 30 ].

According to the Population (P), Exposure (E), Comparator (C), Outcomes (O), and Study Design (S) framework [ 31 ], the following were considered: P, patients in any healthcare setting; E, the COVID-19 pandemic period, as started on 11 March 2020 up to 5 May 2023 [ 30 ]; C, none; O, occurrence, reasons, and consequences of UNC, as perceived by nursing staff; and S, any types of quantitative study designs. Consequently, the following research questions were identified: (1) What was the occurrence of the UNC phenomenon among patients during the pandemic? (2) What were the reasons for the UNC during the pandemic? (3) What were the consequences of the UNC among patients during the pandemic? (4) What were the main methodological features of studies designed/conducted during the pandemic?

The systematic review was reported in its methods and findings according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines [ 32 ].

Ethical considerations

The researchers designed a systematic review protocol that was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023422871).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Studies were considered if they (1) regarded the nursing field; (2) focused on UNC occurrence, its reasons, and/or consequences during the pandemic, as perceived by nurses and nursing aides; (3) were published in English, Italian, or Turkish; (4) collected the data using a validated tool/instrument in the UNC field; (5) were conducted after 11 March 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic up to 5 May 2023 [ 30 ]; and (6) used any types of quantitative designs (randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, prospective or retrospective observational studies, cross-sectional studies, longitudinal studies).

Studies were excluded if they (1) did not address UNC data and/or did not involve nurses/nursing aides or care workers in the nursing field; (2) used non-validated tools/instruments measuring UNC or interviews; (3) were conducted in a paediatric setting, due to its specificity not being comparable with the adult field; (4) were designed as qualitative studies, reviews, commentaries, editorials, or books; (5) were written in other languages; or (6) had an abstract/full text that was not accessible.

Search method

MEDLINE-PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Scopus were searched to identify the eligible studies as sources on 5 May 2023. According to the uniqueness of this research, where no MeSH terms have been established and different key words are used [ 1 , 2 ], all synonymous and equivalent keywords established in the field of UNC were used to access the databases. Specifically, the following keywords were used: “nurse”, “nursing”, “missed care”, “missed nursing care”, “unfinished nursing care”, “unfinished care”, “implicit rationing of nursing care”, “implicit rationing”, “rationing of nursing care”, “rationed care”, “prioritization process”, “omitted nursing care”, “task left undone”, and “task undone” using “OR” and “AND” operators (Supplementary Table 1 ).

Quality Appraisal

The Joanna Briggs Quality Appraisal Tool for analytical cross-sectional studies was used in the quality assessment for all eligible studies when they were based on cross-sectional designs [ 33 ]. This tool contains eight items with response options of yes, no, unclear, and not applicable. These items regarded inclusion criteria, subjects and setting description, exposure, standard criteria for measurement of the condition, confounding factors, strategies to deal with confounding factors, outcomes measurement, and statistical analysis. Two researchers (AB, SC) independently assessed the quality of the studies as “Rater 1” and “Rater 2”. In the case of a disagreement, the senior researcher (AP) was consulted to reach a consensus, as summarised analytically in Supplementary Table 2 .

Besides the quality appraisal, to prevent bias, the following strategies were applied: (a) all researchers contributed to the writing of the review protocol; (b) at least two researchers searched the literature, chose the studies, and extracted the data, independently; (c) the senior researcher oversaw the data extraction; and (d) agreement was required before moving on to each next step.

Data extraction and synthesis

All studies that met the inclusion criteria, regardless of the results of their methodological quality, underwent the data extraction and data synthesis. The studies were divided into two groups and shared between two researchers (AB, SC). In primis , the data extraction grid was piloted in one study, and the findings agreed: no changes were required. Then, researchers independently extracted data from the remaining studies by populating the grid with the following data: (1) author(s), year, and country; (2) study aim(s) and design; (3) sample and setting; and (4) period of data collection and tool(s). Then the findings of the quality appraisal were provided (Table  1 ). At the end of data extraction, the researchers rechecked the data. Disagreements were solved with the consultation of the senior researcher (AP) until consensus was reached.

A narrative synthesis process was used to summarise the findings [ 57 ] according to the review questions, applying the following methodology:

Studies conducted during the pandemic and their methodological quality: the researchers conducted a preliminary synthesis to provide an initial description of the main characteristics of the studies and their methodological quality, and similarities and differences across studies were presented by using textual explanations [ 57 ].

The occurrence of UNC: Findings were tabulated according to the tools used in each study, namely the MISSCARE Survey, the Basel Extent of Rationing of Nursing Care (BERNCA) and the Revised BERNCA (BERNCA-R), the Perceived Implicit Rationing of Nursing Care (PIRNCA), the Basel Extent of Rationing of Nursing Care for Nursing Homes (BERNCA-NH), the Intensive Care Unit Omitted Nursing Care instrument (ICU-ONC), and the Unfinished Nursing Care Survey (UNCS). In all tools, participants are required to rank the nursing interventions missed and/or postponed from always to never. Then, according to the following considerations,

the tools used different metrics (Likert from 1 to 5 for MISSCARE Survey and UNCS, from 0 to 4 for BERNCA, from 0 to 3 for PIRNCA, from 1 to 4 for BERNCA-NH, from 1 to 4 for ICU-ONC) and differed in the direction of measures (e.g., from always missed to never missed, e.g., [ 43 ], or the opposite, e.g. [ 50 ]); and

UNC interventions reflect an order [ 58 , 59 ], such as first, second, and third, of interventions missed, expressing a prioritisation process (what should be actualised first and what can be delayed).

Data regarding the position (= order) of each nursing intervention according to the averages documented in the studies were extracted and then ranked according to the position: for example, the average of 3.23 with the MISSCARE Survey [ 35 ], indicating that this was the most unfinished activity, was ranked as first. Then, according to Blackman and colleagues [ 60 ], the first three interventions of high occurrence of being unfinished were identified; from the fourth to the sixth, those of intermediate occurrence; and from the seventh to ninth, those of a low occurrence of UNC.

The UNC reasons: Reasons were summarised based on the following considerations:

Studies using the MISSCARE Survey and the UNCS reported the reasons for UNC item by item, according to the structure of the tool;

Other studies documented the relationships (as correlations, associations) indicating a significant role of some factors in increasing/hindering UNC during the pandemic.

In the first case, the reasons were extracted and analysed in the same manner as UNC activities; in the second, studies (22 out of 25) documenting a statistically significant relationship of given factors with the UNC were extracted and categorised as organisational, work, or individual factors according to the literature in the field [ 29 ]. Of the remaining three studies, which were not focused on the reason for UNC, one was a methodological study that was focused on the psychometric assessment of the tool [ 56 ], one was a comparative study that was focused on the comparison between the data from a COVID-19 sample and a reference sample [ 54 ], and one was a study in which conditions were identified affected by the consequences of UNC [ 48 ].

UNC main consequences: if any, were described narratively.

All researchers were involved in the data analysis and synthesis process to ensure rigour in the process.

The results regarding the included studies are described below, including an exploration of their characteristics and quality and the occurrence of, reasons for, and consequences of UNC.

Search outcomes

In total, 1,389 articles were identified from the electronic databases. The search results were transferred to a reference manager (Mendeley) to organise the data extraction process. First, three steps were followed for the study selection: in the first stage, titles, in the second stage, abstracts, and in the third stage full text of the retrieved studies were screened for their eligibility by two reviewers (AB, SC), independently. In the case of any disagreement, the opinions of a third senior researcher (AP) were consulted during the entire process. Consensus between the researchers was essential for study inclusion.

In the first stage, 726 studies were excluded; from 1,389 studies, 663 articles were retained for abstract screening. Thus, in the second stage, 298 studies were excluded. At this stage, 365 studies met the criteria for next-step screening. Before the full-text screening, 219 duplicated studies were removed, and a visual inspection was conducted by two researchers (AB, SC) to check for duplicates. Then, 146 studies remained for full-text screening, and 122 of them were excluded for different reasons, as reported in Fig.  1 . The references of the excluded reviews were screened by two researchers (AB, SC) to check their eligibility in an independent fashion and then agreed upon. In total, 38 articles were checked, of which 33 were already included, three were not related to UNC, and one was a qualitative study design. At the end of the screening process, 25 studies were included (Fig.  1 ).

figure 1

PRISMA flow chart

Included studies and their quality

Out of the 25 studies included (Table  1 ), 20 used a descriptive cross-sectional design (e.g., [ 34 ]) and five a comparative cross-sectional design confronting the data (a) before and during the pandemic [ 35 ]; (b) or before the pandemic, and the second/third wave [ 38 ]; and (c) of the COVID-19 sample and the reference sample [ 37 , 48 , 54 ]. Most studies were conducted in Europe (= 12, e.g., [ 50 ]) and Asia (= 11, e.g., [ 45 ]). Of the remaining, one was carried out in Africa [ 47 ] and one in Canada [ 53 ]. Study locations ranged from a hospital (e.g., [ 35 ]) to specific hospital settings (tertiary [ 55 ], district [ 51 ], government [ 56 ], private [ 34 ], teaching [ 50 ]) in various types of units (e.g., medical/surgical [ 54 ], urology [ 43 ], cardiology [ 48 ]). In addition, COVID-19 units were included in two studies [ 22 , 37 , 41 ] and nursing homes in another two [ 22 , 40 ].

Studies were published between 2020 and 2023; however, nine of them completed the data collection in 2020 (e.g., [ 52 ]), 10 in 2021 (e.g., [ 47 ]), two between 2020 and 2021 [ 37 , 50 ], one in 2022 [ 55 ], two between 2019 and 2020 [ 35 , 54 ], and one between 2019 and 2021 [ 38 ]. Participants were mainly nurses, and their sample size ranged from 130 [ 42 ] to 672 [ 34 ] in 21 studies; in others, participants were generally identified as “care workers”, ranging from 374 [ 22 ] to 2,700 [ 40 ], while those including nursing assistants and registered nurses together ranged from 43 [ 48 ] to 287 [ 54 ] participants. The MISSCARE Survey tool was the most used (= 14, e.g., [ 44 ]), followed by BERNCA (= 1, [ 46 ]), Revised BERNCA (BERNCA-R) (= 2, [ 51 , 52 ]), BERNCA-NH (= 2, [ 22 , 40 ]), PIRNCA (= 4, e.g., [ 42 ]), ICU-ONC (= 1, [ 53 ]), and UNCS (= 1, [ 37 ]) (Table  1 ).

All studies reported a good methodological quality with minimal bias (Supplementary Table 2 ). Most were ranked positively for at least six (“yes” responses) out of eight questions (= 11; e.g., [ 39 ]), nine studies for at least seven questions (e.g., [ 44 ]), and five for at least five questions (e.g., [ 41 ]). Four studies failed to clarify the strategies to deal with confounding factors (e.g., [ 56 ]), while seven described these strategies unclearly (e.g., [ 51 ]). The settings and study subjects were stated as being unclear in eight studies (e.g., [ 52 ]). Additionally, in one study, the sample inclusion criteria were not detailed, while in another study, the confounding factors were not reported. The objective, standard criteria used to measure the condition were not assessable in any of the qualified studies, since the condition was considered the COVID-19 disease. At the overall level, all except six studies [ 25 , 34 , 42 , 43 , 46 , 55 ] documented the occurrence of and reasons for UNC activities.

The occurrence of UNC

In the 14 studies based on the MISSCARE survey, the most frequent UNC activities were “Ambulation 3 times per day or as ordered”, “Turning patient every two hours”, “Attending interdisciplinary care conferences whenever held”, “Providing mouth care”, and “Patient teaching about procedures, tests and other diagnostic studies”. In particular, “Ambulation 3 times per day or as ordered” was the activity most missed in three studies [ 35 , 38 , 39 ]; it was the second unfinished activity in the study by Al Muharraq et al. [ 36 ] and the third in another three studies ([ 48 ]; in both the COVID-19 sample and the reference sample of von Vogelsang et al. [ 54 ]) (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ). “Turning patient every two hours” was the most frequent UNC activity in two studies (in the COVID-19 sample of Nymark et al. [ 48 ]; in the reference sample of von Vogelsang et al. [ 54 ]) and the second in another three ([ 35 ]; in the reference sample of Nymark et al. [ 48 ]; in the third wave sample of Falk et al. [ 38 ]). This activity was third in another four studies ([ 35 , 36 , 38 ]; second wave [ 47 ]) (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ). However, the first unfinished activity in five studies was “Attending interdisciplinary care conferences whenever held” ([ 36 , 44 , 49 ]; in the reference sample of Nymark et al. [ 48 ]; in the COVID-19 sample of von Vogelsang et al. [ 54 ]) and “Monitoring patient” in one study [ 45 ] (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ). Conversely, the least frequently unfinished activities were “Monitoring intake/output”, “Vital signs assessed as ordered”, “Bedside glucose monitoring”, and “Patient assessments every shift” (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ).

Considering the studies using the PIRNCA tool, the most frequent unfinished interventions were the “Coordination of care and discharge planning” and the least common the “Implementation of prescribed treatment plan” in Schneider-Matyka et al. [ 50 ]. Contrarily, Yuwanto et al. [ 56 ] discovered that “Coordination of care and discharge planning” were the least frequently unfinished activities. The other most frequent UNC activities were listed in Schneider-Matyka et al. [ 50 ] and Yuwanto et al. [ 56 ], respectively, as (i) “Offer emotional or psychological support”, (ii) “Converse with team members”, (iii) “Converse with external agency”, and (i) “Routine skin care”, (ii) “Converse with external agency”, and (iii) “Assist with bowel and bladder elimination”, while the least unfinished were, respectively, (i) “Medication administration”, (ii) “Enteral and parenteral nutrition”, and (i) “Converse with patient regarding discharge”, (ii) “Infection control practices” (Table  3 , Supplementary Table 4 ).

In accordance with Tomaszewska et al. [ 51 ] and Uchmanowicz et al. [ 52 ], who used BERNCA-R, the most common first, second, and third UNC activities were “Education and training”, “Necessary disinfection measures”, and “Monitoring patients as the nurse felt necessary”. The studies identified “Change of the bed linen”, “Skin care”, and “Assist food intake” as the least frequent UNC activities [ 51 ] (Table  4 , Supplementary Table 5 ).

In two studies that used the BERNCA-NH tool, “Social care” and “Emotional support” reported the highest occurrences [ 22 , 40 ]. The most frequent UNC activities were listed in Hackman et al. [ 40 ] as (i) “Cultural activity for residents with contact outside of nursing home”, (ii) “Scheduled single activity with a resident”, and (i) “Scheduled group activity with several residents”; in contrast, the most frequent unfinished activities in Zhang et al. [ 22 ] were (i) “Activating or rehabilitating care”, (ii) “Emotional support”, and (iii) “Scheduled group activity with several residents”. On the other hand, “Assist dressing/undressing”, “Drinking”, “Food intake”, and “Sponge bath/partial sponge bath/skin care” were listed as the least frequent UNC activities [ 22 , 40 ] (Table  4 , Supplementary Table 5 ).

In the remaining two studies, recent tools were used. In the study conducted using the ICU-ONC tool, the most common unfinished activities were “Mobilization every two hours”, “Mouth care for intubated patients”, and “Document treatments and procedures”; those least frequent were “Cardiac monitoring surveillance”, “Flag the presence of signs or symptoms of infection”, and “Titrate intravenous perfusions for hemodynamic targets” [ 53 ] (Table  5 , Supplementary Table 6 ). In the study using the UNCS [ 37 ], the most frequent UNC for both the COVID-19 sample and the reference sample were “Performing bedside glucose monitoring as prescribed”, “Performing clinical handover to adequately inform the next shift nursing team about patients’ conditions”, and “Recording vital signs as planned”, while the least frequently unfinished activities were “Helping patient in need in ambulation”, “Providing passive mobilization/changing position in bedrest patient”, and “Providing mouth care to patients who need it” (Table  6 , Supplementary Table 7 ).

The reasons for UNC

Among the studies using the MISSCARE Survey, four [ 39 , 45 , 49 , 55 ] did not report the reasons item by item. In the remaining, “Inadequate number of staff” (e.g., in Wave 1 and Wave 2 sample of Falk et al. [ 38 ]; [ 25 ]) was reported as the most significant reason in six studies, “Unexpected raise in patient volume and/or acuity” as the first or second reason in four studies (e.g., [ 38 , 48 ]), and “Urgent patient situations” as the first, second, or third in six studies (e.g., [ 41 , 47 ]) (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ). The reasons for UNC that were given least were “Other departments did not provide the needed care”, “Inadequate hand-off from previous shift or sending unit”, “Caregiver is off unit or unavailable”, and “Tension or communication breakdowns with the medical staff/other support departments” (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ).

Regarding the findings from the UNCS [ 37 ], “Priority setting” and “Supervision of nursing aides” were reported as the most frequent factors causing UNC, followed by “Communication”. In particular, the most frequent reasons were “Inaccurate initial priority setting”, “Tension/conflicts within the nursing staff”, and “Inadequate nursing care model (e.g., functional task-oriented model of care)”. The reasons given least were the material and human resources as well as the unpredictability of the workflows (Table  6 , Supplementary File 7 ).

In 22 studies, UNC has been linked to other, additional factors. Among these, organisational factors, insufficient resources, and large hospital facilities were reported as increasing UNC [ 40 , 45 ]; other factors (e.g., adequate staff, the quality of care, the safety of the patients in the unit, a favourable nursing work environment, and the perceived accountability, organisational support, and leadership) hindered the occurrence of UNC (Table  7 ). Among the work-related factors, the type of shift work (afternoon shift [ 35 ]; 12-hour shift [ 41 ]; both day and night shift (not only night shift) [ 47 ]), overtime work, the type of unit, the workloads, and other factors increased the occurrence of UNC, whereas having a few patients to each nurse or COVID-19 patients, or better staffing levels, all decreased the occurrence of UNC (Table  7 ). Moreover, at the individual level, less than 10 years of experience and several other factors close to the nurses’ emotional state and well-being all decreased the occurrence of UNC (Table  7 ).

The Main consequences of UNC

No studies reported the consequences of UNC.

At the overall level, a total of 25 studies conducted mainly in European and Asiatic countries were produced during the pandemic, around 10 studies a year, continuing the tradition of this research field during difficult times for both nurses and healthcare settings. All tools available in the field were used, mostly the MISSCARE Survey, but also, on fewer occasions, BERNCA, also in its revised forms. As previously, mostly cross-sectional studies along with a few comparative studies were produced, suggesting the likelihood of a merely descriptive intent due to the challenging times. The order of UNC interventions that emerged across studies is substantially in line with pre-pandemic data, while some interesting variations emerged at the country and inter-country levels. Labour resources and reasons close to the emotional state and well-being of nurses were mentioned as most affecting UNC during the pandemic. However, none of the studies investigated the consequences of the phenomenon.

The discussion section follows the results structure and includes a reflection on the methodological quality of the studies and UNC occurrence, reasons, and consequences.

Included studies and their methodological quality

Studies released after the World Health Organisation declared the COVID-19 pandemic [ 30 ] as a period characterised by altered working conditions, workloads, and processes compared to those of the pre-pandemic era were included. No UNC differences between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients emerged [ 63 , 64 ], suggesting that the pandemic affected the whole system. Moreover, given the substantial disruption of the routine care processes in the health systems, which may require time to recover, and with the likelihood of not reaching the same levels of the pre-pandemic era, a comprehensive review may contribute to providing a new reference point for future studies in the field of UNC.

Fewer than 10 studies a year were produced, in line with the pre-pandemic era [ 64 , 65 ]; moreover, data collection was performed mainly in 2020 and 2021, suggesting that available findings reflect the first phases of the pandemic. The leading continents in these studies were Europe and Asia, unlike in the past when the United States was the leading country, given that the missed care/left undone concepts were developed there [ 2 ]. Asian and European countries were those firstly and dramatically hit by the pandemic, thus triggering researchers to measure the UNC. However, the setting of the data collection has remained the hospital, as in the pre-pandemic era [ 66 ]: this finding is in line with the expanded capacity required in the hospitals and the recognition of their key role, especially in some waves, in facing the pandemic. Interestingly, several studies involved more units in very different institutions (e.g., [ 47 ]), which seems to suggest that this research line was scaled up during the pandemic from unit-based studies to large healthcare systems, thus embodying a reasonable health service research perspective because the whole system was changed to provide the care, and no one single part was left unaltered.

The study designs were cross-sectional with some comparative examples, as documented in the pre-pandemic era (e.g., [ 29 ]). The turbulent environments may have prevented longitudinal studies (e.g., to discover UNC outcomes). Forty-three [ 48 ] to 2,700 [ 40 ] nurses, nursing assistants, and care workers were involved, the sample sizes mirroring those of the pre-pandemic era [ 66 ]. However, no studies involved midwives, which suggests a lack of evidence in terms of what happened in maternal and paediatric departments.

Four different tools have been used to measure UNC, from those most validated across the world, namely the MISSCARE Survey [ 39 ] to more recent instruments, such as the ICU-ONC [ 53 ]. The different instruments used reflect the trends in this research field, characterised by a range of validated tools, thus preventing comparisons across studies. On the one hand, the utilisation of classic, well-validated tools may have provided accurate data and increased the comparison with pre- and intra-pandemic studies, whereas on the other hand, tools designed for a non-pandemic situation may have failed in their capacity to detect UNC in extraordinary conditions. Moreover, all tools collected UNC data as perceived by nurses, and their perceptions may have been influenced by the stress and the dramatic working conditions they were experiencing, as well as by the desire to do the best for the patients.

The overall quality of the studies was methodologically good: the extraordinary difficulties posed by the pandemic also required new strategies (e.g., to promote study participation among nurses, design protocols, and initiate studies while other priorities are perceived) in conducting research and seem to have been faced appropriately by researchers.

The different UNC activities, in their order, can be discussed around three main perspectives: (1) the instrument used; (2) the intercountry and intra-countries differences; and (3) the state of the evidence in the pre-pandemic era. The order of UNC interventions emerged across studies, for some countries are substantially in line with pre-pandemic data. The MISSCARE Survey studies highlighted that, during the pandemic, nurses firstly postponed or omitted interventions that call for proximity to the patient, such as oral care, or one-on-one interaction, such as ambulation. Studies using the ICU-ONC tool also showed the same trend, suggesting that these two tools can detect actions of care at the bedside. Nursing interventions related to organisation and communication were instead commonly unfinished in studies using the PIRNCA scale. Communication should also be seen as a fundamental care [ 67 , 68 , 69 ], as speaking and listening were most often seen as a nursing necessity during the pandemic. Differently, education, disinfection measures, and monitoring were the most frequent UNC activities in studies employing the BERNCA scale. Likewise, nursing interventions for patient follow-up were frequently unfinished in a study using the UNCS [ 37 ].

The most significant nursing interventions identified during the pandemic were monitoring, educating the patient, and implementing preventive measures against infections. Nurses may have felt that their usual applications were inadequate or incomplete given the growing demand for these interventions, or they may have believed that they would be unable to complete these applications out of fear of failing. Finally, social and rehabilitative nursing interventions were ranked first as unfinished activities in studies using the BERNCA-NH instrument. This reflects the contingencies of the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced residents of nursing homes to remain in their own rooms [ 70 ]. Therefore, at the overall level, it seems that nurses adopted the pre-pandemic patterns of prioritisation (e.g., failing in ensuring fundamental care) with the intent of reducing exposure in patients’ rooms for an extended period and to avoid the source of contagion [ 71 ], and/or due to the fatigue caused by the personal protective equipment worn (e.g., [ 72 ]). The rationed nursing activities did not turn out to be very different from those of the pre-pandemic period (e.g., [ 2 , 73 ]), as also emerged in those studies that included comparative studies [ 35 , 38 ].

However, interesting intra- and inter-country differences have emerged: at the intra-country level, two main patterns are evident. In Sweden, for example, Falk et al. [ 38 ] and von Vogelsan et al. [ 54 ] found that the three most unfinished activities are substantially the same, whereas in Jordan [ 35 , 44 ] and Iran [ 41 , 49 ], the first three unfinished activities differ (Table  2 , Supplementary Table 3 ). Similarly, at the inter-country level, in those studies using the MISSCARE Survey performed across Europe, the unfinished activities seem to have similar trends in the order pattern. Comparing these countries with those where UNC has started to be measured (e.g., Iran, Jordan, Saudia Arabia, Indonesia, Sultanate of Oman), feeding the patient and offering emotional support were not missed immediately, while attending interdisciplinary meetings was unfinished at first. In the two studies using the BERNCA-NH tool, a similar divergence appeared: in the study by Zhang et al. [ 22 ] performed in China, some activities (i.e., providing emotional support and rehabilitation care) were the first to be unfinished, while in Hackman et al. [ 40 ] these were ranked as being missed less often. Examples can also be found in studies using the PIRNCA and performed in Poland [ 50 ] and Indonesia [ 56 ]. On the one hand, this seems to suggest that when the healthcare system is under tremendous pressure, as during the pandemic, the process of prioritisation is based on pre-established patterns (e.g., across Europe; [ 74 ]); on the other hand, different patterns seem to be enacted outside of Europe, mainly in Asiatic countries. Given that these countries are substantially new to measuring UNC, replicating studies to establish whether the emerged patterns are the same as those used in normal conditions is strongly recommended.

Above all, studies produced during the pandemic period report unfinished activities according to the tool used. For example, the MISSCARE Survey was developed in the early 2000s [ 59 ] and is able to measure “basic” nursing activities; therefore, its capacity to detect exactly what happened in the nursing processes during the pandemic should be debated.

First, issues regarding human resources and the increased needs of patients were the most cited reasons in those studies using the MISSCARE tool, while issues among the staff or across departments impacted only a little. This is likely derived from the expanded capacity of the health systems under urgent circumstances [ 75 ] that increased the well-known shortages in resources, whereas facing the pandemic reduced tensions within the staff and across units, promoting a sense of collaboration [ 76 , 77 ]. Moreover, nurses became infected and were not available when quarantined: all these situations seriously disrupted the capacity of nursing care [ 21 , 22 ], threatening the patients’ needs [ 16 , 17 , 78 ]. Conversely, for Cengia et al. [ 37 ], human resources were not an issue in triggering UNC occurrence; however, this is a single study with the UNC survey tool, and although performed in several facilities, its findings may be interpreted from different perspectives: the units involved in the study may have been better equipped during the pandemic to deal with the situation, or nurses may have learnt for several years how to work under pressure, with limited resources, in a sort of “normalised” condition, where working under such conditions was not an issue [ 63 ].

Other potential reasons documented among studies are in line with those documented by Chiappinotto et al. [ 29 ]. However, two new elements emerged at the overall level among studies performed during the pandemic. Firstly, in those cases where the same reason has been documented (e.g., the role of working overtime [ 25 , 39 , 47 ]), no conflicting findings have been reported across studies, suggesting an evident accumulation of knowledge in the same direction. Previously, conflicting findings emerged for the same reasons across studies, in some increasing and in others hindering the occurrence of UNC (e.g., working overtime [ 29 ]). The increased homogeneity of the findings that emerged in the pandemic studies may depend on the same circumstances experienced in all healthcare services across the world. Secondly, several emotional factors at the nurses’ level (e.g., satisfaction, burnout, satisfaction with economic situation, stress) have been investigated and associated with UNC. The focus seems to be the professional and personal well-being of the nurses, reasons that may have a role as antecedents of UNC but that also express the consequences of the unfinished care phenomenon itself as well as the consequences of the exacerbated working conditions during the pandemic.

No UNC consequences have been documented to date confirming the tradition of this research field in which outcomes are under-reported [ 79 ]. In difficult times with turbulent environments, unstable staff, and disconnections between healthcare settings (e.g., hospital and community settings), it would be difficult to link the occurrence of UNC to the different potential outcomes at the patient, nurse, and organisational levels [ 5 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. However, the occurrence of UNC may have bolstered the negative effects of other widely observed phenomena, such as the decreased accessibility and continuity of care observed during the pandemic, thus indirectly affecting the health outcomes at both the individual and collective levels (e.g., reduced screening, reduced care for cancer patients) [ 80 , 81 ].


This review has several limitations. First, databases were searched using well-known established keywords in the field, strictly connected with the conceptual definitions in the field and with the tools measuring the phenomenon. Moreover, given that no MeSH terms have been established in the field, researchers used keywords. Consequently, some studies may have been missed. Second, studies whose data collection period was uncertain or ambiguous (e.g., started before or during the pandemic) were excluded. Moreover, studies not using validated instruments with available reliability and validity data were also excluded, and these decisions may have introduced a selection bias. Furthermore, grey literature was not assessed, introducing additional selection bias. Third, we included only articles written in English, Turkish, or Italian, so the comprehensiveness of this review could have been threatened by the exclusion of other languages. Fourth, in the data analysis and synthesis process, an approach was adopted aiming at ensuring accuracy given the different measurement tools used in the field. Moreover, the data analysis process was conducted in an innovative manner by considering each intervention or reason at the granular level (the order, according to the statistical values) instead of the global level (global scores). This may have provided clarity, but it may have compromised the depiction of a global picture of the phenomenon. No previous similar approaches have been used in this field. Accumulating evidence with additional studies, such as summarising findings in the post-pandemic era, may corroborate the analytical strategy used.

UNC studies produced during the pandemic documented the occurrence of the phenomenon and its reasons mainly in the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. These studies were conducted mainly in Europe and Asia, which were the first to be dramatically affected by the pandemic. The studies involved multicentre units in the attempt to measure the whole response of the healthcare settings, mainly using the MISSCARE Survey with descriptive intents and using quality, sound research methodologies.

At the overall level, those nursing care activities that were mostly unfinished during the pandemic are substantially the same as those reported in the pre-pandemic era, suggesting that nurses applied the same prioritisation responses in difficult times. However, interesting intra- and inter-country differences emerged: those countries new to measuring unfinished care reported different patterns compared to those seen in Europe and the US, where this research is well established; they also reported intra-country variations, suggesting an interesting new course of research in the field. The new patterns that emerged should be better investigated through post-pandemic studies to discover whether they reflected the decision-making process during difficult conditions or a different prioritisation process.

Across studies, the primary reasons for UNC were listed as labour resources, followed by other specific reasons related to organisational, work, and individual variables. Substantially, the evidence is in line with that previously documented. However, findings are consistent across studies, suggesting that health services experienced similar pressure worldwide. Moreover, several emotional factors have been investigated among nurses, revealing their important role in triggering UNC. This level should be investigated further, considering the long-term consequences of the pandemic on the well-being of the workforce. Given that no studies have attempted to measure the UNC consequences, more efforts are also required in this direction.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].


Basel Extend of Rationing of Nursing Care

Basel Extent of Rationing of Nursing Care for Nursing Homes

Basel Extent of Rationing of Nursing Care Revised

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature


Intensive Care Unit Omitted Nursing Care instrument

Perceived Implicit Rationing of Nursing Care

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis

Unfinished Nursing Care

Unfinished Nursing Care Survey

World Health Organization

Jones TL, Hamilton P, Murry N. Unfinished nursing care, missed care, and implicitly rationed care: state of the science review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(6):1121–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.02.012 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kalisch BJ. Missed nursing care: a qualitative study. J Nurs Care Qual. 2006;21(4):306–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001786-200610000-00006 .

Bail K, Grealish L. Failure to maintain’: a theoretical proposition for a new quality indicator of nurse care rationing for complex older people in hospital. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;63:146–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.08.001 .

VanFosson CA, Jones TL, Yoder LH. Unfinished nursing care: an important performance measure for nursing care systems. Nurs Outlook. 2016;64(2):124–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2015.12.010 .

Kalisch BJ, Gosselin K, Choi SH. A comparison of patient care units with high versus low levels of missed nursing care. Health Care Manage Rev. 2012;37(4):320–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0b013e318249727e .

Ball J, Griffiths P. Missed nursing care: A key measure for patient safety. 2018. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/perspective/missed-nursing-care-key-measure-patient-safety#References . Assessed 2 Nov 2023.

Blackman I, Papastavrou E, Palese A, Vryonides S, Henderson J, Willis E. Predicting variations to missed nursing care: a three-nation comparison. J Nurs Manag. 2018;26(1):33–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12514 .

Chaboyer W, Harbeck E, Lee BO, Grealish L. Missed nursing care: an overview of reviews. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2021;37(2):82–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/kjm2.12308 .

Chegini Z, Jafari-Koshki T, Kheiri M, Behforoz A, Aliyari S, Mitra U, Islam SMS. Missed nursing care and related factors in Iranian hospitals: a cross-sectional survey. J Nurs Manag. 2020;28(8):2205–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13055 .

Griffiths P, Recio-Saucedo A, Dall’Ora C, Briggs J, Maruotti A, Meredith P, Smith GB, Ball J, The Missed Care Study Group. The association between nurse staffing and omissions in nursing care: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74(7):1474–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13564 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jangland E, Teodorsson T, Molander K, Athlin ÅM. Inadequate environment, resources and values lead to missed nursing care: a focused ethnographic study on the surgical ward using the fundamentals of care framework. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(11–12):2311–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14095 .

Cho E, Lee N-J, Kim E-Y, Kim S, Lee K, Park K-O, Sung YH. Nurse staffing level and overtime associated with patient safety, quality of care, and care left undone in hospitals: a cross-sectional study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;60:263–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.05.009 .

Kalánková D, Kirwan M, Bartonícková D, Cubelo F, Žiaková K, Kurucová R. Missed, rationed or unfinished nursing care: a scoping review of patient outcomes. J Nurs Manag. 2020;28(8):1783–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12978 .

Recio-Saucedo A, Dall’Ora C, Maruotti A, Ball J, Briggs J, Meredith P, Redfern OC, Kovacs C, Prytherch D, Smith GB, Griffiths P. What impact does nursing care left undone have on patient outcomes? Review of the literature. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(11–12):2248–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14058 .

Catton H. Global challenges in health and health care for nurses and midwives everywhere. Int Nurs Rev. 2020;67(1):4–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12578 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Clari M, Luciani M, Conti A, Sciannameo V, Berchialla P, Di Giulio P, Campagna S, Dimonte V. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on nursing care: a cross-sectional survey-based study. J Pers Med. 2021;11(10):945. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11100945 .

Tuczynska M, Staszewski R, Matthews-Kozanecka M, Zok A, Baum E. Quality of the healthcare services during COVID-19 pandemic in selected European countries. Front Public Health. 2022;10:8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.870314 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Labrague LJ, de los Santos JAA. Fear of COVID-19, psychological distress, work satisfaction and turnover intention among frontline nurses. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(3):395–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13168 .

Gomez-Salgado J, Domínguez-Salas S, Romero-Martín M, Romero A, Coronado-Vázquez V, Ruiz-Frutos C. Work engagement and psychological distress of health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29:1016–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13239 .

Labrague LJ. Pandemic fatigue and clinical nurses’ mental health, sleep quality and job contentment during the covid-19 pandemic: the mediating role of resilience. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(7):1992–2001. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13383 .

Said RM, El-Shafei DA. Occupational stress, job satisfaction, and intent to leave: nurses working on front lines during COVID-19 pandemic in Zagazig City, Egypt. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2021;28(7):8791–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11235-8 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Zhang SX, Chen J, Afshar Jahanshahi A, Alvarez-Risco A, Dai H, Li J, Patty-Tito RM. Succumbing to the COVID-19 pandemic-Healthcare workers not satisfied and intend to leave their Jobs. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2021;20(2):956–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00418-6 .

Crowe S, Howard AF, Vanderspank-Wright B, Gillis P, McLeod F, Penner C, Haljan G. The effect of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of Canadian critical care nurses providing patient care during the early phase pandemic: a mixed method study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2021;63:102999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2020.102999 .

Danielis M, Mattiussi E. The care of patients through the lens of the fundamentals into times of the COVID-19 outbreak. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2020;60:102883. 10.1016/j. iccn.2020.102883.

Gurková E, Bartoníčková D, Mikšová Z, Labudíková M, Chocholková D. Reasons for unfinished nursing care from the perspective of nurses from regional and university hospitals. KONTAKT. 2021;23(4). https://doi.org/10.32725/kont.2021.026 .

Šehović AB, Govender K, Addressing. COVID-19 vulnerabilities: how do we achieve global health security in an inequitable world. Glob Public Health. 2021;16:1198–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2021.1916056 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Nash DB, Angelo M, Nash EJ, Gleason JL, Meyer BA. We know health is not elective: impacts of COVID-19. Popul Health Manag. 2020;23(5):378–85. https://doi.org/10.1089/pop.2020.0161 .

Imam A, Obiesie S, Gathara D, Aluvaala J, Maina M, English M. Missed nursing care in acute care hospital settings in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Hum Resour Health. 2023;21(1):19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-023-00807-7 .

Chiappinotto S, Papastavrou E, Efstathiou G, Andreou P, Stemmer R, Ströhm C, Schubert M, de Wolf-Linder S, Longhini J, Palese A. Antecedents of unfinished nursing care: a systematic review of the literature. BMC Nurs. 2022;21(1):137. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-00890-6 .

World Health Organization. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19–11 March 2020. 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 . Accessed 20 January 2024.

Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med. 2003;96(3):118–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304 .

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .

Joanna Briggs Institute. Checklist for analytical cross sectional studies. 2020. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools . Accessed 20 January 2024.

Albsoul RA, Alshyyab MA, Hughes JA, Jones L, FitzGerald G. Examining the reasons for missed nursing care from the viewpoints of nurses in public, private, and university hospitals in Jordan: a cross-sectional research. Collegian. 2023;30(1):110–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2022.08.001 .

Alfuqaha OA, Alhalaiqa FN, Alqurneh MK, Ayed A. Missed nursing care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative cross-sectional study. Int Nurs Rev. 2023;70(1):100–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12795 .

Al Muharraq EH, Alallah SM, Alkhayrat SA, Jahlan AG. An overview of missed nursing care and its predictors in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. Nurs Res Pract. 2022;4971890. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4971890 .

Cengia MG, Di Falco A, Allegrini E, Ambrosi E, Brugnaro L, Zambon A, Saiani L, Grassetti L, Palese A. Occurrence and reasons for unfinished nursing care between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Int Nurs Rev. 2022;69(4):420–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12746 .

Falk AC, Nymark C, Göransson KE, von Vogelsang AC. Missed nursing care in the critical care unit, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative cross-sectional study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2022;72:103276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103276 .

Gurková E, Mikšová Z, Šáteková L. Missed nursing care in hospital environments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int Nurs Rev. 2022;69(2):175–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12710 .

Hackman P, Hult M, Häggman-Laitila A. Unfinished nursing care in nursing homes. Geriatr Nurs. 2023;51:33–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2023.02.010 .

Hosseini Z, Raisi L, Maghari AH, Karimollahi M. Missed nursing care in the COVID-19 pandemic in Iran. Int J Nurs Knowl. 2023;34(3):179–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/2047-3095.12390 .

Jarosz K, Zborowska A, Młynarska A, Rationing, Care. Job satisfaction, fatigue and the level of Professional Burnout of nurses in Urology Departments. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(14):8625. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148625 .

Jarosz K, Młynarska A. The impact of Sociodemographic Factors on the rationing of nursing care in Urology wards. Nurs Rep. 2023;13(1):561–72. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep13010051 .

Khrais H, Alsadi M, Oweidat I, Ahmad M. Determinants of missed nursing care in Jordanian hospitals during COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs Open. 2023;10(3):1565–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1407 .

Labrague LJ, de Los Santos JAA, Fronda DC. Factors associated with missed nursing care and nurse-assessed quality of care during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Nurs Manag. 2022;30(1):62–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13483 .

Maghsoud F, Rezaei M, Asgarian FS, Rassouli M. Workload and quality of nursing care: the mediating role of implicit rationing of nursing care, job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion by using structural equations modeling approach. BMC Nurs. 2022;21(1):273. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-01055-1 .

Mingude AB, Negese B, Emiru M, Gonitie GB. Magnitude of missed nursing care and associated factors in case of North Shewa Zone public hospitals, Amhara regional state, Ethiopia. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2022;17:100497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijans.2022.100497 .

Nymark C, von Vogelsang AC, Falk AC, Göransson KE. Patient safety, quality of care and missed nursing care at a cardiology department during the COVID-19 outbreak. Nurs Open. 2022;9(1):385–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1076 .

Rahmani P, Molaei Tavani F, Sheikhalipour Z, Behshid M, Khodayari MT, Zadi Akhuleh O. The relationship between attitude of nurses toward the patient safety and missed nursing care: a predictive study. J Healthc Qual Res. 2022;37(3):138–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhqr.2021.10.007 .

Schneider-Matyka D, Świątoniowska-Lonc N, Polański J, Szkup M, Grochans E, Jankowska-Polańska B. Assessment of the effect of stress, Sociodemographic Variables and work-related factors on rationing of nursing care. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(3):2414. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032414 .

Tomaszewska K, Majchrowicz B, Ratusznik D. Rationing of nursing care on example of selected Health Care Facility. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(23):12824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312824 .

Uchmanowicz I, Kubielas G, Serzysko B, Kołcz A, Gurowiec P, Kolarczyk E. Rationing of nursing care and Professional Burnout among nurses Working in Cardiovascular settings. Front Psychol. 2021;12:726318. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726318 .

Vincelette C, D’Aragon F, Stevens LM, Rochefort CM. The characteristics and factors associated with omitted nursing care in the intensive care unit: a cross-sectional study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2023;75:103343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103343 .

von Vogelsang AC, Göransson KE, Falk AC, Nymark C. Missed nursing care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparative observational study. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(8):2343–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13392 .

Xie LL, Jiang W, Niyomsilp E, Jing J, Feng L, Wen Y, Wang L, Zheng R. Effect of role overload on missed nursing care in China: the role of work addiction and leader-member exchange. Nurs Open. 2023;10(5):3153–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1565 .

Yuwanto MA, Putra KR, Windarwati HD. Perceived implicit rationing of nursing care: psychometric assessment in the Indonesian context. Nurs Pract Today. 2023;10(1):23–31. https://doi.org/10.18502/npt.v10i1.12254 .

Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, Britten N, Roen K, Duffy S. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: a product from the ESRC methos programme. 2006. https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/fhm/dhr/chir/NSsynthesisguidanceVersion1-April2006.pdf . Assessed 2 Nov 2023.

Bassi E, Tartaglini D, Valpiani G, Grassetti L, Palese A. Unfinished nursing care survey: a development and validation study. J Nurs Manag. 2020;28(8):2061–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13170 .

Kalisch BJ, Williams RA. Development and psychometric testing of a tool to measure missed nursing care. J Nurs Adm. 2009;39(5):211–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0b013e3181a23cf5 .

Blackman I, Lye CY, Darmawan IGN, Henderson J, Giles T, Willis E, Toffoli L, Xiao L, Verrall C. Modeling missed care: implications for evidence-based practice. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2018;15(3):178–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12285 .

Schubert M, Glass TR, Clarke SP, Schaffert-Witvliet B, De Geest S. Validation of the Basel extent of rationing of nursing care instrument. Nurs Res. 2007;56(6):416–24. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NNR.0000299853.52429.62 .

Zúñiga F, Ausserhofer D, Hamers JP, Engberg S, Simon M, Schwendimann R. The relationship of staffing and work environment with implicit rationing of nursing care in Swiss nursing homes–A cross-sectional study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(9):1463–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.05.005 .

Palese A, Bassi E, Bayram A, Dal Molin A, Chiappinotto S. Measuring missed nursing care during the Covid-19 pandemic: methodological reflections. Ass Inf Ric. 2023;42(2):98–102. https://doi.org/10.1702/4050.40315 .

Chiappinotto S, Bayram A, Grassetti L, Galazzi A, Palese A. Were the unfinished nursing care occurrence, reasons, and consequences different between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients? A systematic review. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):341. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01513-4 .

Papastavrou E, Suhonen R, editors. Impacts of rationing and missed nursing care: challenges and solutions: RANCARE Action. Springer International Publishing; 2021.

Palese A, Navone E, Danielis M, Vryonides S, Sermeus W, Papastavrou E. Measurement tools used to assess unfinished nursing care: a systematic review of psychometric properties. J Adv Nurs. 2021;77(2):565–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14603 .

Diaz-Agea JL, Orcajada-Munoz I, Leal-Costa C, Adanez-Martinez MG, De Souza Oliveira AC, Rojo-Rojo A. How did the pandemic affect communication in clinical settings? A qualitative study with critical and emergency care nurses. Healthc (Basel). 2022;10:373. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10020373 .

Ferrari G, Dobrina R, Buchini S, Rudan I, Schreiber S, Bicego L. The impact of personal protective equipment and social distancing on communication and relation between nurses, caregivers and children: a descriptive qualitative study in a maternal and child health hospital. J Clin Nurs. 2021;1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15857 .

Sugg HVR, Russell AM, Morgan LM, Iles-Smith H, Richards DA, Morley N, Burnett S, Cockcroft EJ, Thompson Coon J, Cruickshank S, Doris FE, Hunt HA, Kent M, Logan PA, Rafferty AM, Shepherd MH, Singh SJ, Tooze SJ, Whear R. Fundamental nursing care in patients with the SARS-CoV-2 virus: results from the ‘COVID-NURSE’ mixed methods survey into nurses’ experiences of missed care and barriers to care. BMC Nurs. 2021;20(1):215. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00746-5 .

Palese A, Chiappinotto S, Peghin M, Marin M, Turello D, Caporale D, Tascini C. What Kind of interventions were perceived as effective against Coronavirus-19 in nursing homes in Italy? A descriptive qualitative study. Risk Manag Health Policy. 2022;15:1795–808. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S377249 .

Maffoni M, Fiabane E, Setti I, Martelli S, Pistarini C, Sommovigo V. Moral Distress among Frontline Physicians and nurses in the early phase of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(15):9682. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159682 .

Jun Y, Lee O, Kim S. Impact of personal protective equipment attached powered air-purifying respirator on nursing-skill performance and psychosocial stress of intensive care unit COVID-19 nurses: a cross-sectional study. J Clin Nurs. 2023;32(11–12):2922–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.16686 .

Zeleníková R, Jarošová D, Polanská A, Mynaříková E. Implicit rationing of nursing care reported by nurses from different types of hospitals and hospital units. J Clin Nurs. 2023;32(15–16):4962–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.16695 .

Sist L, Palese A. Le Decisioni Infermieristiche E Le missed nursing care: risultati di una scoping review [Decision making process and missed nursing care: findings from a scoping review]. Ass Inf Ric. 2020;39(4):188–200. https://doi.org/10.1702/3508.34952 .

American Hospital Association. Financial Effects of COVID-19: Hospital Outlook for the Remainder of 2021. 2021. https://www.aha.org/guidesreports/2021-09-21-financial-effects-covid-19-hospital-outlook-remainder-2021 . Accessed 20 January 2024.

Mayo AT. Teamwork in a pandemic: insights from management research. BMJ Lead. 2020;4:53–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000246 .

Mayo AT, Woolley AW. Variance in group ability to transform resources into performance, and the role of coordinated attention. AMD. 2020.

Markkanen P, Brouillette N, Quinn M, Galligan C, Sama S, Lindberg J, Karlsson N. It changed everything: the safe home care qualitative study of the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on home care aides, clients, and managers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):1055. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07076-x .

Stemmer R, Bassi E, Ezra S, Harvey C, Jojo N, Meyer G, Özsaban A, Paterson C, Shifaza F, Turner MB, Bail K. A systematic review: unfinished nursing care and the impact on the nurse outcomes of job satisfaction, burnout, intention-to-leave and turnover. J Adv Nurs. 2022;78(8):2290–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15286 .

Moraliyage H, De Silva D, Ranasinghe W, Adikari A, Alahakoon D, Prasad R, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton D. Cancer in Lockdown: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with Cancer. Oncologist. 2021;26(2):e342–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/onco.13604 .

Benazzi B, Bevilacqua S, De Togni S, Milani E, Perdomini M, Laquintana D. Preparedness for emergencies: strategies to increase the supply of beds and advanced intensive skills. Assist Inferm Ric. 2023 Jan-Mar;42(1):12–20. Italian. https://doi.org/10.1702/4023.39982 . PMID: 37283135.

Download references


Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Health Sciences, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey

Aysun Bayram

Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy

Stefania Chiappinotto & Alvisa Palese

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar


All authors (AP, AB, SC) gave substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work. AB and SC collected, analysed and interpreted the data and drafted the manuscript. AP gave the final approval of the version to be published. All authors gained an agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefania Chiappinotto .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

A systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023422871).

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, supplementary material 3, supplementary material 4, supplementary material 5, supplementary material 6, supplementary material 7, supplementary material 8, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bayram, A., Chiappinotto, S. & Palese, A. Unfinished nursing care in healthcare settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 352 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10708-7

Download citation

Received : 02 November 2023

Accepted : 12 February 2024

Published : 19 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-10708-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Unfinished nursing care
  • COVID-19 pandemic
  • Consequences

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

research article using nursing theory

Claude Moore Health Sciences Library

Nursing Resources

  • Connecting from Off-Grounds
  • IDEA Resources
  • BSN Resources
  • CNL Resources
  • DNP Resources
  • PhD Resources
  • APRN Resources
  • Citation and Review Management Resources
  • Database Tutorials
  • Publishing and Scholarly Communication
  • Nursing Research
  • Evidence-Based Practice
  • History of Nursing Resources

Nursing Theory and Frameworks

ask us

School of Nursing Resources

Please visit the following guides for more resources on nursing theory and frameworks:

  • Nursing Theoretical Frameworks The University of Buffalo's guide on nursing theoretical frameworks
  • Guide to Nursing Theory The University of Toledo’s Guide to Nursing Theory – includes tips on how to search specific databases for theory and theorist-related information
  • EBP Implementation Models A guide to EBP implementation models from the University of Toledo
  • << Previous: History of Nursing Resources


  • Last Updated: Mar 18, 2024 9:14 AM
  • URL: https://guides.hsl.virginia.edu/SON

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Perspective
  • Published: 06 March 2024

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research

  • Lisa Messeri   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0964-123X 1   na1 &
  • M. J. Crockett   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8800-410X 2 , 3   na1  

Nature volume  627 ,  pages 49–58 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

18k Accesses

3 Citations

697 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Human behaviour
  • Interdisciplinary studies
  • Research management
  • Social anthropology

Scientists are enthusiastically imagining ways in which artificial intelligence (AI) tools might improve research. Why are AI tools so attractive and what are the risks of implementing them across the research pipeline? Here we develop a taxonomy of scientists’ visions for AI, observing that their appeal comes from promises to improve productivity and objectivity by overcoming human shortcomings. But proposed AI solutions can also exploit our cognitive limitations, making us vulnerable to illusions of understanding in which we believe we understand more about the world than we actually do. Such illusions obscure the scientific community’s ability to see the formation of scientific monocultures, in which some types of methods, questions and viewpoints come to dominate alternative approaches, making science less innovative and more vulnerable to errors. The proliferation of AI tools in science risks introducing a phase of scientific enquiry in which we produce more but understand less. By analysing the appeal of these tools, we provide a framework for advancing discussions of responsible knowledge production in the age of AI.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

research article using nursing theory

Crabtree, G. Self-driving laboratories coming of age. Joule 4 , 2538–2541 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Wang, H. et al. Scientific discovery in the age of artificial intelligence. Nature 620 , 47–60 (2023). This review explores how AI can be incorporated across the research pipeline, drawing from a wide range of scientific disciplines .

Article   CAS   PubMed   ADS   Google Scholar  

Dillion, D., Tandon, N., Gu, Y. & Gray, K. Can AI language models replace human participants? Trends Cogn. Sci. 27 , 597–600 (2023).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Grossmann, I. et al. AI and the transformation of social science research. Science 380 , 1108–1109 (2023). This forward-looking article proposes a variety of ways to incorporate generative AI into social-sciences research .

Gil, Y. Will AI write scientific papers in the future? AI Mag. 42 , 3–15 (2022).

Google Scholar  

Kitano, H. Nobel Turing Challenge: creating the engine for scientific discovery. npj Syst. Biol. Appl. 7 , 29 (2021).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Benjamin, R. Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020). This book examines how social norms about race become embedded in technologies, even those that are focused on providing good societal outcomes .

Broussard, M. More Than a Glitch: Confronting Race, Gender, and Ability Bias in Tech (MIT Press, 2023).

Noble, S. U. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism (New York Univ. Press, 2018).

Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A. & Shmitchell, S. On the dangers of stochastic parrots: can language models be too big? in Proc. 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency 610–623 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2021). One of the first comprehensive critiques of large language models, this article draws attention to a host of issues that ought to be considered before taking up such tools .

Crawford, K. Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence (Yale Univ. Press, 2021).

Johnson, D. G. & Verdicchio, M. Reframing AI discourse. Minds Mach. 27 , 575–590 (2017).

Article   Google Scholar  

Atanasoski, N. & Vora, K. Surrogate Humanity: Race, Robots, and the Politics of Technological Futures (Duke Univ. Press, 2019).

Mitchell, M. & Krakauer, D. C. The debate over understanding in AI’s large language models. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2215907120 (2023).

Kidd, C. & Birhane, A. How AI can distort human beliefs. Science 380 , 1222–1223 (2023).

Birhane, A., Kasirzadeh, A., Leslie, D. & Wachter, S. Science in the age of large language models. Nat. Rev. Phys. 5 , 277–280 (2023).

Kapoor, S. & Narayanan, A. Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science. Patterns 4 , 100804 (2023).

Hullman, J., Kapoor, S., Nanayakkara, P., Gelman, A. & Narayanan, A. The worst of both worlds: a comparative analysis of errors in learning from data in psychology and machine learning. In Proc. 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (eds Conitzer, V. et al.) 335–348 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2022).

Rudin, C. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1 , 206–215 (2019). This paper articulates the problems with attempting to explain AI systems that lack interpretability, and advocates for building interpretable models instead .

Crockett, M. J., Bai, X., Kapoor, S., Messeri, L. & Narayanan, A. The limitations of machine learning models for predicting scientific replicability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2307596120 (2023).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Lazar, S. & Nelson, A. AI safety on whose terms? Science 381 , 138 (2023).

Article   PubMed   ADS   Google Scholar  

Collingridge, D. The Social Control of Technology (St Martin’s Press, 1980).

Wagner, G., Lukyanenko, R. & Paré, G. Artificial intelligence and the conduct of literature reviews. J. Inf. Technol. 37 , 209–226 (2022).

Hutson, M. Artificial-intelligence tools aim to tame the coronavirus literature. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01733-7 (2020).

Haas, Q. et al. Utilizing artificial intelligence to manage COVID-19 scientific evidence torrent with Risklick AI: a critical tool for pharmacology and therapy development. Pharmacology 106 , 244–253 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Müller, H., Pachnanda, S., Pahl, F. & Rosenqvist, C. The application of artificial intelligence on different types of literature reviews – a comparative study. In 2022 International Conference on Applied Artificial Intelligence (ICAPAI) https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAPAI55158.2022.9801564 (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2022).

van Dinter, R., Tekinerdogan, B. & Catal, C. Automation of systematic literature reviews: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 136 , 106589 (2021).

Aydın, Ö. & Karaarslan, E. OpenAI ChatGPT generated literature review: digital twin in healthcare. In Emerging Computer Technologies 2 (ed. Aydın, Ö.) 22–31 (İzmir Akademi Dernegi, 2022).

AlQuraishi, M. AlphaFold at CASP13. Bioinformatics 35 , 4862–4865 (2019).

Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596 , 583–589 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   ADS   Google Scholar  

Lee, J. S., Kim, J. & Kim, P. M. Score-based generative modeling for de novo protein design. Nat. Computat. Sci. 3 , 382–392 (2023).

Gómez-Bombarelli, R. et al. Design of efficient molecular organic light-emitting diodes by a high-throughput virtual screening and experimental approach. Nat. Mater. 15 , 1120–1127 (2016).

Krenn, M. et al. On scientific understanding with artificial intelligence. Nat. Rev. Phys. 4 , 761–769 (2022).

Extance, A. How AI technology can tame the scientific literature. Nature 561 , 273–274 (2018).

Hastings, J. AI for Scientific Discovery (CRC Press, 2023). This book reviews current and future incorporation of AI into the scientific research pipeline .

Ahmed, A. et al. The future of academic publishing. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7 , 1021–1026 (2023).

Gray, K., Yam, K. C., Zhen’An, A. E., Wilbanks, D. & Waytz, A. The psychology of robots and artificial intelligence. In The Handbook of Social Psychology (eds Gilbert, D. et al.) (in the press).

Argyle, L. P. et al. Out of one, many: using language models to simulate human samples. Polit. Anal. 31 , 337–351 (2023).

Aher, G., Arriaga, R. I. & Kalai, A. T. Using large language models to simulate multiple humans and replicate human subject studies. In Proc. 40th International Conference on Machine Learning (eds Krause, A. et al.) 337–371 (JMLR.org, 2023).

Binz, M. & Schulz, E. Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2218523120 (2023).

Ornstein, J. T., Blasingame, E. N. & Truscott, J. S. How to train your stochastic parrot: large language models for political texts. Github , https://joeornstein.github.io/publications/ornstein-blasingame-truscott.pdf (2023).

He, S. et al. Learning to predict the cosmological structure formation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116 , 13825–13832 (2019).

Article   MathSciNet   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mahmood, F. et al. Deep adversarial training for multi-organ nuclei segmentation in histopathology images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 39 , 3257–3267 (2020).

Teixeira, B. et al. Generating synthetic X-ray images of a person from the surface geometry. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 9059–9067 (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2018).

Marouf, M. et al. Realistic in silico generation and augmentation of single-cell RNA-seq data using generative adversarial networks. Nat. Commun. 11 , 166 (2020).

Watts, D. J. A twenty-first century science. Nature 445 , 489 (2007).

boyd, d. & Crawford, K. Critical questions for big data. Inf. Commun. Soc. 15 , 662–679 (2012). This article assesses the ethical and epistemic implications of scientific and societal moves towards big data and provides a parallel case study for thinking about the risks of artificial intelligence .

Jolly, E. & Chang, L. J. The Flatland fallacy: moving beyond low–dimensional thinking. Top. Cogn. Sci. 11 , 433–454 (2019).

Yarkoni, T. & Westfall, J. Choosing prediction over explanation in psychology: lessons from machine learning. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12 , 1100–1122 (2017).

Radivojac, P. et al. A large-scale evaluation of computational protein function prediction. Nat. Methods 10 , 221–227 (2013).

Bileschi, M. L. et al. Using deep learning to annotate the protein universe. Nat. Biotechnol. 40 , 932–937 (2022).

Barkas, N. et al. Joint analysis of heterogeneous single-cell RNA-seq dataset collections. Nat. Methods 16 , 695–698 (2019).

Demszky, D. et al. Using large language models in psychology. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 2 , 688–701 (2023).

Karjus, A. Machine-assisted mixed methods: augmenting humanities and social sciences with artificial intelligence. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.14379 (2023).

Davies, A. et al. Advancing mathematics by guiding human intuition with AI. Nature 600 , 70–74 (2021).

Peterson, J. C., Bourgin, D. D., Agrawal, M., Reichman, D. & Griffiths, T. L. Using large-scale experiments and machine learning to discover theories of human decision-making. Science 372 , 1209–1214 (2021).

Ilyas, A. et al. Adversarial examples are not bugs, they are features. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.02175 (2019)

Semel, B. M. Listening like a computer: attentional tensions and mechanized care in psychiatric digital phenotyping. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 47 , 266–290 (2022).

Gil, Y. Thoughtful artificial intelligence: forging a new partnership for data science and scientific discovery. Data Sci. 1 , 119–129 (2017).

Checco, A., Bracciale, L., Loreti, P., Pinfield, S. & Bianchi, G. AI-assisted peer review. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 8 , 25 (2021).

Thelwall, M. Can the quality of published academic journal articles be assessed with machine learning? Quant. Sci. Stud. 3 , 208–226 (2022).

Dhar, P. Peer review of scholarly research gets an AI boost. IEEE Spectrum spectrum.ieee.org/peer-review-of-scholarly-research-gets-an-ai-boost (2020).

Heaven, D. AI peer reviewers unleashed to ease publishing grind. Nature 563 , 609–610 (2018).

Conroy, G. How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing. Nature 622 , 234–236 (2023).

Nosek, B. A. et al. Replicability, robustness, and reproducibility in psychological science. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 73 , 719–748 (2022).

Altmejd, A. et al. Predicting the replicability of social science lab experiments. PLoS ONE 14 , e0225826 (2019).

Yang, Y., Youyou, W. & Uzzi, B. Estimating the deep replicability of scientific findings using human and artificial intelligence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 10762–10768 (2020).

Youyou, W., Yang, Y. & Uzzi, B. A discipline-wide investigation of the replicability of psychology papers over the past two decades. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2208863120 (2023).

Rabb, N., Fernbach, P. M. & Sloman, S. A. Individual representation in a community of knowledge. Trends Cogn. Sci. 23 , 891–902 (2019). This comprehensive review paper documents the empirical evidence for distributed cognition in communities of knowledge and the resultant vulnerabilities to illusions of understanding .

Rozenblit, L. & Keil, F. The misunderstood limits of folk science: an illusion of explanatory depth. Cogn. Sci. 26 , 521–562 (2002). This paper provided an empirical demonstration of the illusion of explanatory depth, and inspired a programme of research in cognitive science on communities of knowledge .

Hutchins, E. Cognition in the Wild (MIT Press, 1995).

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991).

Kitcher, P. The division of cognitive labor. J. Philos. 87 , 5–22 (1990).

Hardwig, J. Epistemic dependence. J. Philos. 82 , 335–349 (1985).

Keil, F. in Oxford Studies In Epistemology (eds Gendler, T. S. & Hawthorne, J.) 143–166 (Oxford Academic, 2005).

Weisberg, M. & Muldoon, R. Epistemic landscapes and the division of cognitive labor. Philos. Sci. 76 , 225–252 (2009).

Sloman, S. A. & Rabb, N. Your understanding is my understanding: evidence for a community of knowledge. Psychol. Sci. 27 , 1451–1460 (2016).

Wilson, R. A. & Keil, F. The shadows and shallows of explanation. Minds Mach. 8 , 137–159 (1998).

Keil, F. C., Stein, C., Webb, L., Billings, V. D. & Rozenblit, L. Discerning the division of cognitive labor: an emerging understanding of how knowledge is clustered in other minds. Cogn. Sci. 32 , 259–300 (2008).

Sperber, D. et al. Epistemic vigilance. Mind Lang. 25 , 359–393 (2010).

Wilkenfeld, D. A., Plunkett, D. & Lombrozo, T. Depth and deference: when and why we attribute understanding. Philos. Stud. 173 , 373–393 (2016).

Sparrow, B., Liu, J. & Wegner, D. M. Google effects on memory: cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science 333 , 776–778 (2011).

Fisher, M., Goddu, M. K. & Keil, F. C. Searching for explanations: how the internet inflates estimates of internal knowledge. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 144 , 674–687 (2015).

De Freitas, J., Agarwal, S., Schmitt, B. & Haslam, N. Psychological factors underlying attitudes toward AI tools. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7 , 1845–1854 (2023).

Castelo, N., Bos, M. W. & Lehmann, D. R. Task-dependent algorithm aversion. J. Mark. Res. 56 , 809–825 (2019).

Cadario, R., Longoni, C. & Morewedge, C. K. Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5 , 1636–1642 (2021).

Oktar, K. & Lombrozo, T. Deciding to be authentic: intuition is favored over deliberation when authenticity matters. Cognition 223 , 105021 (2022).

Bigman, Y. E., Yam, K. C., Marciano, D., Reynolds, S. J. & Gray, K. Threat of racial and economic inequality increases preference for algorithm decision-making. Comput. Hum. Behav. 122 , 106859 (2021).

Claudy, M. C., Aquino, K. & Graso, M. Artificial intelligence can’t be charmed: the effects of impartiality on laypeople’s algorithmic preferences. Front. Psychol. 13 , 898027 (2022).

Snyder, C., Keppler, S. & Leider, S. Algorithm reliance under pressure: the effect of customer load on service workers. Preprint at SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4066823 (2022).

Bogert, E., Schecter, A. & Watson, R. T. Humans rely more on algorithms than social influence as a task becomes more difficult. Sci Rep. 11 , 8028 (2021).

Raviv, A., Bar‐Tal, D., Raviv, A. & Abin, R. Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors. Eur. J. Personal. 7 , 119–138 (1993).

Cummings, L. The “trust” heuristic: arguments from authority in public health. Health Commun. 29 , 1043–1056 (2014).

Lee, M. K. Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management. Big Data Soc. 5 , https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718756684 (2018).

Kissinger, H. A., Schmidt, E. & Huttenlocher, D. The Age of A.I. And Our Human Future (Little, Brown, 2021).

Lombrozo, T. Explanatory preferences shape learning and inference. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20 , 748–759 (2016). This paper provides an overview of philosophical theories of explanatory virtues and reviews empirical evidence on the sorts of explanations people find satisfying .

Vrantsidis, T. H. & Lombrozo, T. Simplicity as a cue to probability: multiple roles for simplicity in evaluating explanations. Cogn. Sci. 46 , e13169 (2022).

Johnson, S. G. B., Johnston, A. M., Toig, A. E. & Keil, F. C. Explanatory scope informs causal strength inferences. In Proc. 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 2453–2458 (Cognitive Science Society, 2014).

Khemlani, S. S., Sussman, A. B. & Oppenheimer, D. M. Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s scope: latent scope biases in explanatory reasoning. Mem. Cognit. 39 , 527–535 (2011).

Liquin, E. G. & Lombrozo, T. Motivated to learn: an account of explanatory satisfaction. Cogn. Psychol. 132 , 101453 (2022).

Hopkins, E. J., Weisberg, D. S. & Taylor, J. C. V. The seductive allure is a reductive allure: people prefer scientific explanations that contain logically irrelevant reductive information. Cognition 155 , 67–76 (2016).

Weisberg, D. S., Hopkins, E. J. & Taylor, J. C. V. People’s explanatory preferences for scientific phenomena. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 3 , 44 (2018).

Jerez-Fernandez, A., Angulo, A. N. & Oppenheimer, D. M. Show me the numbers: precision as a cue to others’ confidence. Psychol. Sci. 25 , 633–635 (2014).

Kim, J., Giroux, M. & Lee, J. C. When do you trust AI? The effect of number presentation detail on consumer trust and acceptance of AI recommendations. Psychol. Mark. 38 , 1140–1155 (2021).

Nguyen, C. T. The seductions of clarity. R. Inst. Philos. Suppl. 89 , 227–255 (2021). This article describes how reductive and quantitative explanations can generate a sense of understanding that is not necessarily correlated with actual understanding .

Fisher, M., Smiley, A. H. & Grillo, T. L. H. Information without knowledge: the effects of internet search on learning. Memory 30 , 375–387 (2022).

Eliseev, E. D. & Marsh, E. J. Understanding why searching the internet inflates confidence in explanatory ability. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 37 , 711–720 (2023).

Fisher, M. & Oppenheimer, D. M. Who knows what? Knowledge misattribution in the division of cognitive labor. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 27 , 292–306 (2021).

Chromik, M., Eiband, M., Buchner, F., Krüger, A. & Butz, A. I think I get your point, AI! The illusion of explanatory depth in explainable AI. In 26th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (eds Hammond, T. et al.) 307–317 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2021).

Strevens, M. No understanding without explanation. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. A 44 , 510–515 (2013).

Ylikoski, P. in Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives (eds De Regt, H. et al.) 100–119 (Univ. Pittsburgh Press, 2009).

Giudice, M. D. The prediction–explanation fallacy: a pervasive problem in scientific applications of machine learning. Preprint at PsyArXiv https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4vq8f (2021).

Hofman, J. M. et al. Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science. Nature 595 , 181–188 (2021). This paper highlights the advantages and disadvantages of explanatory versus predictive approaches to modelling, with a focus on applications to computational social science .

Shmueli, G. To explain or to predict? Stat. Sci. 25 , 289–310 (2010).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Hofman, J. M., Sharma, A. & Watts, D. J. Prediction and explanation in social systems. Science 355 , 486–488 (2017).

Logg, J. M., Minson, J. A. & Moore, D. A. Algorithm appreciation: people prefer algorithmic to human judgment. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 151 , 90–103 (2019).

Nguyen, C. T. Cognitive islands and runaway echo chambers: problems for epistemic dependence on experts. Synthese 197 , 2803–2821 (2020).

Breiman, L. Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Stat. Sci. 16 , 199–215 (2001).

Gao, J. & Wang, D. Quantifying the benefit of artificial intelligence for scientific research. Preprint at arxiv.org/abs/2304.10578 (2023).

Hanson, B. et al. Garbage in, garbage out: mitigating risks and maximizing benefits of AI in research. Nature 623 , 28–31 (2023).

Kleinberg, J. & Raghavan, M. Algorithmic monoculture and social welfare. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2018340118 (2021). This paper uses formal modelling methods to demonstrate that when companies all rely on the same algorithm to make decisions (an algorithmic monoculture), the overall quality of those decisions is reduced because valuable options can slip through the cracks, even when the algorithm performs accurately for individual companies .

Article   MathSciNet   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hofstra, B. et al. The diversity–innovation paradox in science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 9284–9291 (2020).

Hong, L. & Page, S. E. Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101 , 16385–16389 (2004).

Page, S. E. Where diversity comes from and why it matters? Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44 , 267–279 (2014). This article reviews research demonstrating the benefits of cognitive diversity and diversity in methodological approaches for problem solving and innovation .

Clarke, A. E. & Fujimura, J. H. (eds) The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in Twentieth-Century Life Sciences (Princeton Univ. Press, 2014).

Silva, V. J., Bonacelli, M. B. M. & Pacheco, C. A. Framing the effects of machine learning on science. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01515-x (2022).

Sassenberg, K. & Ditrich, L. Research in social psychology changed between 2011 and 2016: larger sample sizes, more self-report measures, and more online studies. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2 , 107–114 (2019).

Simon, A. F. & Wilder, D. Methods and measures in social and personality psychology: a comparison of JPSP publications in 1982 and 2016. J. Soc. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2022.2135088 (2022).

Anderson, C. A. et al. The MTurkification of social and personality psychology. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 45 , 842–850 (2019).

Latour, B. in The Social After Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments (ed. Candea, M.) 145–162 (Routledge, 2010).

Porter, T. M. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life (Princeton Univ. Press, 1996).

Lazer, D. et al. Meaningful measures of human society in the twenty-first century. Nature 595 , 189–196 (2021).

Knox, D., Lucas, C. & Cho, W. K. T. Testing causal theories with learned proxies. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 25 , 419–441 (2022).

Barberá, P. Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data. Polit. Anal. 23 , 76–91 (2015).

Brady, W. J., McLoughlin, K., Doan, T. N. & Crockett, M. J. How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Sci. Adv. 7 , eabe5641 (2021).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   ADS   Google Scholar  

Barnes, J., Klinger, R. & im Walde, S. S. Assessing state-of-the-art sentiment models on state-of-the-art sentiment datasets. In Proc. 8th Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity, Sentiment and Social Media Analysis (eds Balahur, A. et al.) 2–12 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017).

Gitelman, L. (ed.) “Raw Data” is an Oxymoron (MIT Press, 2013).

Breznau, N. et al. Observing many researchers using the same data and hypothesis reveals a hidden universe of uncertainty. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2203150119 (2022). This study demonstrates how 73 research teams analysing the same dataset reached different conclusions about the relationship between immigration and public support for social policies, highlighting the subjectivity and uncertainty involved in analysing complex datasets .

Gillespie, T. in Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society (eds Gillespie, T. et al.) 167–194 (MIT Press, 2014).

Leonelli, S. Data-Centric Biology: A Philosophical Study (Univ. Chicago Press, 2016).

Wang, A., Kapoor, S., Barocas, S. & Narayanan, A. Against predictive optimization: on the legitimacy of decision-making algorithms that optimize predictive accuracy. ACM J. Responsib. Comput. , https://doi.org/10.1145/3636509 (2023).

Athey, S. Beyond prediction: using big data for policy problems. Science 355 , 483–485 (2017).

del Rosario Martínez-Ordaz, R. Scientific understanding through big data: from ignorance to insights to understanding. Possibility Stud. Soc. 1 , 279–299 (2023).

Nussberger, A.-M., Luo, L., Celis, L. E. & Crockett, M. J. Public attitudes value interpretability but prioritize accuracy in artificial intelligence. Nat. Commun. 13 , 5821 (2022).

Zittrain, J. in The Cambridge Handbook of Responsible Artificial Intelligence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (eds. Voeneky, S. et al.) 176–184 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022). This article articulates the epistemic risks of prioritizing predictive accuracy over explanatory understanding when AI tools are interacting in complex systems.

Shumailov, I. et al. The curse of recursion: training on generated data makes models forget. Preprint at arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493 (2023).

Latour, B. Science In Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society (Harvard Univ. Press, 1987). This book provides strategies and approaches for thinking about science as a social endeavour .

Franklin, S. Science as culture, cultures of science. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 24 , 163–184 (1995).

Haraway, D. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem. Stud. 14 , 575–599 (1988). This article acknowledges that the objective ‘view from nowhere’ is unobtainable: knowledge, it argues, is always situated .

Harding, S. Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research (Univ. Chicago Press, 2015).

Longino, H. E. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry (Princeton Univ. Press, 1990).

Daston, L. & Galison, P. Objectivity (Princeton Univ. Press, 2007). This book is a historical analysis of the shifting modes of ‘objectivity’ that scientists have pursued, arguing that objectivity is not a universal concept but that it shifts alongside scientific techniques and ambitions .

Prescod-Weinstein, C. Making Black women scientists under white empiricism: the racialization of epistemology in physics. Signs J. Women Cult. Soc. 45 , 421–447 (2020).

Mavhunga, C. What Do Science, Technology, and Innovation Mean From Africa? (MIT Press, 2017).

Schiebinger, L. The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science (Harvard Univ. Press, 1991).

Martin, E. The egg and the sperm: how science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male–female roles. Signs J. Women Cult. Soc. 16 , 485–501 (1991). This case study shows how assumptions about gender affect scientific theories, sometimes delaying the articulation of what might be considered to be more accurate descriptions of scientific phenomena .

Harding, S. Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”? Centen. Rev. 36 , 437–470 (1992). In this article, Harding outlines her position on ‘strong objectivity’, by which clearly articulating one’s standpoint can lead to more robust knowledge claims .

Oreskes, N. Why Trust Science? (Princeton Univ. Press, 2019). This book introduces the reader to 20 years of scholarship in science and technology studies, arguing that the tools the discipline has for understanding science can help to reinstate public trust in the institution .

Rolin, K., Koskinen, I., Kuorikoski, J. & Reijula, S. Social and cognitive diversity in science: introduction. Synthese 202 , 36 (2023).

Hong, L. & Page, S. E. Problem solving by heterogeneous agents. J. Econ. Theory 97 , 123–163 (2001).

Sulik, J., Bahrami, B. & Deroy, O. The diversity gap: when diversity matters for knowledge. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 17 , 752–767 (2022).

Lungeanu, A., Whalen, R., Wu, Y. J., DeChurch, L. A. & Contractor, N. S. Diversity, networks, and innovation: a text analytic approach to measuring expertise diversity. Netw. Sci. 11 , 36–64 (2023).

AlShebli, B. K., Rahwan, T. & Woon, W. L. The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration. Nat. Commun. 9 , 5163 (2018).

Campbell, L. G., Mehtani, S., Dozier, M. E. & Rinehart, J. Gender-heterogeneous working groups produce higher quality science. PLoS ONE 8 , e79147 (2013).

Nielsen, M. W., Bloch, C. W. & Schiebinger, L. Making gender diversity work for scientific discovery and innovation. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2 , 726–734 (2018).

Yang, Y., Tian, T. Y., Woodruff, T. K., Jones, B. F. & Uzzi, B. Gender-diverse teams produce more novel and higher-impact scientific ideas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2200841119 (2022).

Kozlowski, D., Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C. R. & Monroe-White, T. Intersectional inequalities in science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2113067119 (2022).

Fehr, C. & Jones, J. M. Culture, exploitation, and epistemic approaches to diversity. Synthese 200 , 465 (2022).

Nakadai, R., Nakawake, Y. & Shibasaki, S. AI language tools risk scientific diversity and innovation. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7 , 1804–1805 (2023).

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine et al. Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEMM Organizations: Beyond Broadening Participation (National Academies Press, 2023).

Winner, L. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109 , 121–136 (1980).

Eubanks, V. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (St. Martin’s Press, 2018).

Littmann, M. et al. Validity of machine learning in biology and medicine increased through collaborations across fields of expertise. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2 , 18–24 (2020).

Carusi, A. et al. Medical artificial intelligence is as much social as it is technological. Nat. Mach. Intell. 5 , 98–100 (2023).

Raghu, M. & Schmidt, E. A survey of deep learning for scientific discovery. Preprint at arxiv.org/abs/2003.11755 (2020).

Bishop, C. AI4Science to empower the fifth paradigm of scientific discovery. Microsoft Research Blog www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/ai4science-to-empower-the-fifth-paradigm-of-scientific-discovery/ (2022).

Whittaker, M. The steep cost of capture. Interactions 28 , 50–55 (2021).

Liesenfeld, A., Lopez, A. & Dingemanse, M. Opening up ChatGPT: Tracking openness, transparency, and accountability in instruction-tuned text generators. In Proc. 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces 1–6 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2023).

Chu, J. S. G. & Evans, J. A. Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2021636118 (2021).

Park, M., Leahey, E. & Funk, R. J. Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time. Nature 613 , 138–144 (2023).

Frith, U. Fast lane to slow science. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24 , 1–2 (2020). This article explains the epistemic risks of a hyperfocus on scientific productivity and explores possible avenues for incentivizing the production of higher-quality science on a slower timescale .

Stengers, I. Another Science is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science (Wiley, 2018).

Lake, B. M. & Baroni, M. Human-like systematic generalization through a meta-learning neural network. Nature 623 , 115–121 (2023).

Feinman, R. & Lake, B. M. Learning task-general representations with generative neuro-symbolic modeling. Preprint at arxiv.org/abs/2006.14448 (2021).

Schölkopf, B. et al. Toward causal representation learning. Proc. IEEE 109 , 612–634 (2021).

Mitchell, M. AI’s challenge of understanding the world. Science 382 , eadm8175 (2023).

Sartori, L. & Bocca, G. Minding the gap(s): public perceptions of AI and socio-technical imaginaries. AI Soc. 38 , 443–458 (2023).

Download references


We thank D. S. Bassett, W. J. Brady, S. Helmreich, S. Kapoor, T. Lombrozo, A. Narayanan, M. Salganik and A. J. te Velthuis for comments. We also thank C. Buckner and P. Winter for their feedback and suggestions.

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Lisa Messeri, M. J. Crockett

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

Lisa Messeri

Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

M. J. Crockett

University Center for Human Values, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar


The authors contributed equally to the research and writing of the paper.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Lisa Messeri or M. J. Crockett .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature thanks Cameron Buckner, Peter Winter and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Messeri, L., Crockett, M.J. Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research. Nature 627 , 49–58 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07146-0

Download citation

Received : 31 July 2023

Accepted : 31 January 2024

Published : 06 March 2024

Issue Date : 07 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07146-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Ai is no substitute for having something to say.

Nature Reviews Physics (2024)

Perché gli scienziati si fidano troppo dell'intelligenza artificiale - e come rimediare

Nature Italy (2024)

Why scientists trust AI too much — and what to do about it

Nature (2024)

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

research article using nursing theory

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 19.3.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Agendas on Nursing in South Korea Media: Natural Language Processing and Network Analysis of News From 2005 to 2022

Authors of this article:

Author Orcid Image

Original Paper

  • Daemin Park 1 , PhD   ; 
  • Dasom Kim 2 , PhD   ; 
  • Ah-hyun Park 3 , PhD  

1 School of Media & Communication, Sunmoon University, Chungcheongnam-do, Republic of Korea

2 Home Visit Healthcare Team, Expert Group on Health Promotion for Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul, Republic of Korea

3 Tobacco Control Team, Expert Group on Health Promotion for Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Corresponding Author:

Dasom Kim, PhD

Home Visit Healthcare Team

Expert Group on Health Promotion for Seoul Metropolitan Government

#410, Life Science Building.Annex, 120, Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu

Seoul, 05029

Republic of Korea

Phone: 82 1072040418

Email: [email protected]

Background: In recent years, Korean society has increasingly recognized the importance of nurses in the context of population aging and infectious disease control. However, nurses still face difficulties with regard to policy activities that are aimed at improving the nursing workforce structure and working environment. Media coverage plays an important role in public awareness of a particular issue and can be an important strategy in policy activities.

Objective: This study analyzed data from 18 years of news coverage on nursing-related issues. The focus of this study was to examine the drivers of the social, local, economic, and political agendas that were emphasized in the media by the analysis of main sources and their quotes. This analysis revealed which nursing media agendas were emphasized (eg, social aspects), neglected (eg, policy aspects), and negotiated.

Methods: Descriptive analysis, natural language processing, and semantic network analysis were applied to analyze data collected from 2005 to 2022. BigKinds were used for the collection of data, automatic multi-categorization of news, named entity recognition of news sources, and extraction and topic modeling of quotes. The main news sources were identified by conducting a 1-mode network analysis with SNAnalyzer. The main agendas of nursing-related news coverage were examined through the qualitative analysis of major sources’ quotes by section. The common and individual interests of the top-ranked sources were analyzed through a 2-mode network analysis using UCINET.

Results: In total, 128,339 articles from 54 media outlets on nursing-related issues were analyzed. Descriptive analysis showed that nursing-related news was mainly covered in social (99,868/128,339, 77.82%) and local (48,056/128,339, 48.56%) sections, whereas it was rarely covered in economic (9439/128,339, 7.35%) and political (7301/128,339, 5.69%) sections. Furthermore, 445 sources that had made the top 20 list at least once by year and section were analyzed. Other than “nurse,” the main sources for each section were “labor union,” “local resident,” “government,” and “Moon Jae-in.” “Nursing Bill” emerged as a common interest among nurses and doctors, although the topic did not garner considerable attention from the Ministry of Health and Welfare. Analyzing quotes showed that nurses were portrayed as heroes, laborers, survivors of abuse, and perpetrators. The economic section focused on employment of youth and women in nursing. In the political section, conflicts between nurses and doctors, which may have caused policy confusion, were highlighted. Policy formulation processes were not adequately reported. Media coverage of the enactment of nursing laws tended to relate to confrontations between political parties.

Conclusions: The media plays a crucial role in highlighting various aspects of nursing practice. However, policy formulation processes to solve nursing issues were not adequately reported in South Korea. This study suggests that nurses should secure policy compliance by persuading the public to understand their professional perspectives.


Controversy over nursing legislation in south korea.

The COVID-19 pandemic has renewed the focus on the importance of nurses in South Korea’s health care system with a resultant increase in the interest in improving the nursing workforce structure, working conditions, and treatment [ 1 ]. Although the pandemic has fueled a movement to improve nursing policies in South Korea, nurses face difficulties in nursing-related policy activities because of various stakeholders and policy environments. As the nursing profession is regulated by the Medical Service Act enacted in 1951, rather than an independent law such as the Nursing Bill, there are concerns about the inadequacy of the legal status or rights of nurses and, consequently, their diminished role in the health care system.

In South Korea, the debate over nursing legislation has been ongoing for more than a decade. In 2005, Kim Sun-mi, a representative of the ruling Uri Party, first proposed nursing legislation—the Nursing Bill—in the Korean National Assembly; however, the bill was abandoned. In 2018, the bill was reintroduced and rejected and was eventually passed in the National Assembly in April 2023 as the Nursing Bill, shortly after the COVID-19 pandemic ended. However, President Yoon Suk Yeol vetoed the Nursing Bill, and the bill was rejected again in May 2023.

Compared with the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is presently difficult to obtain a favorable public opinion among the public and other professions at the policy level. This may be because of the differences between the general public’s interests in nurses’ workforce structure, work, and treatment and the need for nursing-related policies [ 2 , 3 ].

Research Context: The Importance of Media in Health Policy

Media coverage has an important impact on shaping public opinion on certain issues. The policy agenda–setting theory suggests that media coverage of an issue can influence the public agenda, which in turn can influence the policy agenda [ 4 , 5 ]. When the media continues to report on an issue, it draws public attention, which can lead to an increased public demand for action from policymakers. Thus, media coverage can be viewed as a form of valuable large-scale data that reflects the flow of social interest and changes in a particular phenomenon or issue. These data can be used to identify paradigm shifts in policies related to the issue.

With the aging population and increasing prevalence of chronic diseases, the medical burden would increase in South Korea. Furthermore, changes in the social environment and policies, such as the introduction of integrated nursing care services, affect the demand for nursing care. In this context, it is important for the public and policymakers to understand nursing care accurately. Media coverage has a significant impact on public perception of medical issues [ 6 , 7 ]. However, research on media coverage in nursing is still limited.

Previous studies focused on identifying the images of nurses in the media or analyzing individual issues [ 1 , 8 - 11 ]. Both the original Woodhull study conducted in 1997 and a subsequent study conducted in 2017 examined the representation of nurses in health-related news coverage. However, both studies had limitations in that the research involved analysis of news from a single year and focused solely on the health-related context without exploring nurses’ representation as news sources in all news sections [ 12 , 13 ].

Methodologically, several studies have used natural language processing (NLP) of news data, topic modeling, and network analysis [ 8 - 11 , 14 ]. However, most studies analyzed articles over a short period of less than a year [ 8 - 11 , 14 ]. This strategy has limited the scope of these studies and prevented them from capturing the entire range of issues faced by the nursing community. Additionally, the short timeframe of these studies makes it difficult to capture the long-term development and context of policymaking.

For collecting and NLP of data, we used BigKinds, the largest public news database in South Korea, comprising over 80 million news articles published starting in 1990 [ 15 , 16 ]. It was developed by the Korea Press Foundation, a governmental organization, to support the copyright business of news media. BigKinds is widely used for academic research of news analysis in various fields including nursing studies [ 9 , 11 ]. This study also conducted network analysis and qualitative analysis of quotes.

This study examined how nursing-related issues have changed over time by analyzing, by year and section, approximately 130,000 articles that were published in 54 major Korean media outlets over an 18-year period.

This study focuses on the sources of news articles and their quotes. Sources are key informants whom a reporter has heard directly from and therefore cited in the news for a direct quote [ 17 ]. In communication studies, sources are the most important elements of news writing. News is a description of what a source has said [ 18 ]. Thus, citing sources is a core factual practice in journalism, along with presenting figures and being present at the scene for direct observation [ 19 ].

This study aimed to examine the drivers of the social, local, economic, and political agendas emphasized in the media by the analysis of main sources and their quotes. This analysis revealed which nursing media agendas were emphasized (eg, social aspects), neglected (eg, policy aspects), and negotiated. Furthermore, this study determined the way in which policy formulation processes were not adequately reported.

Research Questions

The research questions (RQs) of this study are as follows:

  • RQ1: How many articles were reported by year and section?
  • RQ2: Who have been the main sources of media coverage of nurses since 2005, by year and section?
  • RQ3: What concerns did the health care community, in particular, nurses, medical doctors, and the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW), pay more attention to and what were their common concerns?
  • RQ4: What are the key issues of nursing controversies in the press in quotes?

RQ1 was researched by descriptive analysis; RQ2 was researched by analyzing the news source network; was researched RQ3 by analyzing the news source-topic network; and RQ4 was researched by an analysis of quotes from key sources. This strategy will allow us to see who has led the agenda-setting of nurse-related issues and to identify the agenda that has been emphasized by each section in the media.

Study Design

Descriptive analysis, NLP, and semantic network analysis were applied to analyze data collected from 2005 to 2022 using BigKinds (Korea Press Foundation), SNAnalyzer, and UCINET. First, BigKinds were used for the collection of data, descriptive analysis, automatic multi-categorization of news, named entity recognition (NER) of news sources, and extraction of quotes from news articles. Second, the main news sources were identified by conducting a 1-mode network analysis with SNAnalyzer. Third, the main agendas of nursing-related news coverage were examined by conducting the qualitative analysis of major sources’ quotes by section. Fourth, the common and individual interests of the top-ranked sources were analyzed through a 2-mode network analysis using UCINET.

Data Collection

The collection of news data with NLP was conducted using BigKinds. We used 1 search term “간호사,” which means “nurse” in Korean. It is rare that an article about nurses does not mention “nurses”; rather, there may be an article that contains the word “nurse” but indirectly deals with nurses. Articles wherein nurses were peripherally featured were not excluded as they could provide context for nurse coverage.

This study collected data from sources and quotes in nurse articles published in South Korea from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2022. In 2005, an independent nursing law was proposed for the first time in South Korea by a member of the National Assembly.

The news articles were collected from 54 major domestic media outlets, including national, economic, local, broadcasting, and specialized newspapers, and provided by BigKinds.

Natural Language Processing

BigKinds provides various advanced NLP functions, including automatic article classification, NER, quote extraction, mapping of sources and quotes through semantic analysis, and auto-tagging and ranking of topics in each quote through topic modeling.

The news analyzed was selected from 4 sections—social, local, economic, and political—which are highly related to the policy aspects of nurses and contain numerous articles. The sections are automatically classified by BigKinds. Automatic classification overcomes the differences in naming sections between years and media outlets. Each article can be categorized into a maximum of 3 different sections. For instance, a political article dealing with regional issues can be classified into both political and local sections simultaneously.

Source extraction is accomplished through NER for names, affiliations, and job titles. According to the manual, BigKinds’ NER uses an algorithm that combines structured support vector machine and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) with an F 1 -score of 91.5%.

We extracted quotes from BigKinds and mapped sources to their quotes through semantic analysis. This study focused on major sources’ quotes.

Data cleansing was done in 2 stages. In the first stage, we removed incorrect sources based on character count, part of speech, and so on. Furthermore, we removed anonymous sources and remaining institutional sources. We kept sources who were labeled as a profession or group, such as “nurses” or “hospitals,” and who were closely related to the research topics.

The second round of cleansing was conducted after ranking the sources according to the news source network analysis described later. Given the nature of semantic networks, incorrect results in NLP tend to be marginalized by low rankings. Therefore, rather than refining the entire data set from the beginning, it is more efficient to refine only the top-ranked sources who are candidates for the analysis.

In this study, we first performed a second round of cleansing on the top 100 sources. If there was a synonym for the name of an organization due to using abbreviations or anaphoras, we kept the higher-ranked source and unified them with the same name. Through this process, the top 20 news sources by section and year were selected. All the different sources that were tied around the 20th position of the cutoff were included. Finally, 445 sources that had made the top 20 list at least once by year and section were selected. We present the top 20 sources in each section based on cumulative yearly degree centrality, summarized briefly.

Descriptive Analysis

BigKinds provides the number of articles related to searching keywords by year and section. The total number of articles is deduplicated but the sum of the number of articles by section can exceed the total number of articles because each article is categorized into up to 3 sections.

Semantic Network Analysis

In this study, thousands of sources were cited in the articles related to nursing for decades. Thus, semantic network analysis was performed to rank sources by year and section and determine the relationship between sources and topics. Specifically, news source network analysis and news source-topic network analysis were conducted.

The news source network is an undirected 1-mode network with sources as nodes and article cooccurrences as edges. The importance of each source is evaluated based on the degree centrality of the news source network. A source with a high degree centrality appears in many articles and is discussed in many agendas with many different sources [ 16 ]. We also provide descriptive information (size, number of edges, and density) of networks.

A program called SNAnalyzer was used for network analysis [ 16 , 20 ]. SNAnalyzer analyzes multiple Excel files simultaneously with folder-to-folder input and output and provides data cleansing, file name standardization, degree centrality, tie strength, ranking, and descriptive statistics for up to 1,048,575 nodes per file.

NetDraw of UCINET software was used to visualize the news source-topic network. News source-topic network analysis is a 2-mode undirected network with sources and quote topics as nodes and quote cooccurrences as edges. The strength of networks shows the number of times the sources mentioned each topic. News source–topic network analysis can be used to determine which topics are of common interest to sources, and which are of interest only to specific sources. This study focused on 3 groups of sources: nurses, doctors, and the MOHW. Each group was merged according to their affiliations to compare interests at the organizational level.

Quote Analysis

This study also performed quote analysis as a qualitative analysis to deeply understand the context of nursing in news media. In quote analysis, we focused on quotes uttered by the top 445 sources of each year and each section and contained the word “nursing” as a topic in the quotes. Because most top sources were highly cited, analyzing the quotes alone from the top sources resulted in analyzing a substantial number of citations. The number of quotes containing “간호 (nursing)” was 26,926. The total number of deduplicated quotes was 162,316.

Ethical Considerations

Due to the nature of the research involving nonhuman participants, this study was exempt from review by the institutional review board of SM University (202302-001-1). Researchers collected publicly available existing data.

The total number of articles was 128,339, excluding duplicate articles. The number of articles per section was 99,868 for the social section, 48,056 for the local section, 9439 for the economy section, and 7301 for the political section. A given article was classified as a duplicate in up to 3 sections.

Figure 1 shows the frequency distribution of the articles by year and section. The years 2009, 2015, and 2020 saw surges in news articles corresponding to the swine flu, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and COVID-19 epidemics, respectively. In 2018, a “burning” incident—a metaphor for bullying in the workplace—occurred among nurses at the Asan Medical Center in Seoul. This incident led to a rapid increase in the number of articles that focused on the nursing culture. These results suggest that the media paid considerable attention to the response to new infectious diseases and accidents in the nursing profession.

research article using nursing theory

Semantic Network Analysis: News Source Network Analysis

There were 72 news source networks. We present the size, number of edges, and density of these networks as network-level descriptive statistics in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

Multimedia Appendices 2 - 5 present the top 20 sources by centrality value, which represents the level of connectivity in terms of the years and sections. Each source’s rank is determined as the sum of the links. Sources related to the social aspect include incidents and accidents, medical and health issues, education, labor and welfare, trade unions, and activities in civil society. Local governments, such as the Seoul metropolitan government, police, and courts, serve as major sources for the social departments of media companies. Therefore, nurses and police are recognized as important sources in the social sector.

The main sources representing each section are briefly presented in the following sections with tables in the Multimedia Appendices. The interests of main sources are discussed in more detail in the sections on news source-topic network analysis and quote analysis.

Social Section

“Nurses (the total sum of the degree centrality is 2091)” were the most important sources in the social section of the media, especially in crucial cases such as the 2009 H1N1 influenza epidemic (degree centrality in 2009 is 65), the 2013 Jinju Medical Center incident (sum of degree=74), the 2015 MERS incident (sum of degree=117), and the 2016 nurse workplace bullying and medical malpractice controversy (sum of degree=130). The above-described importance persisted through 2018 (sum of degree=176) and was further emphasized by the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in 2020 (sum of degree=351) in a different context. During the COVID-19 pandemic, governmental sources, such as Central Disaster Management (242 in 2021), came to the forefront.

The period when the “hospital” source (the total sum of the degree centrality is 1790) was considered important coincided with the period when the “nurse” source served as an important source. This was mainly because the hospital was both a nurse’s workplace and a medical malpractice site. The importance of the “police” source significantly increased in 2018 (sum of degree=158) when the issue of nurse suicide by bullying and medical malpractice gained social prominence.

Local Section

“Hospital” (577 in total) is the most important source in the local section, especially in 2009 (sum of degree=42), 2014-2015 (sum of degree=34 and 38), and 2017-2021 (sum of degree=54, 36, 39, 103, and 70). During these periods, various impertinent issues were highlighted, including overwork, poor working conditions, and subsequent turnover within the hospital setting. Trade unions have emerged as crucial sources and have thereby contributed to the discourse surrounding the identified issues.

Related to the “labor union” (207 in total), specific incidents that garnered significant attention included the decision to close the Jinju Medical Center in South Gyeongsang Province in 2013 (sum of degree=37), which was criticized for the perceived moral hazard potential. Additionally, the general strike organized by the health care union in 2021 (sum of degree=36) in regard to the expansion of doctor numbers and the adjustment of the patient-to-nurse ratio became a topic of extensive discussion.

The media have played a vital role in disseminating information and shaping public opinion during the COVID-19 pandemic. Of particular interest were the decisions made by the local governments and their respective heads with regard to quarantine measures. For example, during the COVID-19 outbreak in Daegu in early 2020, Daegu’s health care and quarantine systems were quickly overwhelmed, and media coverage of the crisis was extensive. “Kwon Young-jin” (135 in 2020), the mayor of Daegu Metropolitan City, appeared in the news, as well as “Gwangju Metropolitan Government” (26 in 2020), which helped Daegu during its time of need. In July 2020, Daegu extended its helping hand to Gwangju when the latter faced a shortage of hospital beds due to the surge in COVID-19 cases. This act of solidarity and collaboration exemplifies the importance of interregional cooperation during public health emergencies.

Furthermore, the enactment of local government ordinances aimed at supporting essential workers, including nurses, in a non–face-to-face environment, as necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, is noteworthy. In this context, “Chong Won-o” (76 in total), head of the Seongdong-gu District Office in Seoul, enacted ordinances on safety measures, web-based work-support systems, and psychological counseling for essential workers such as nurses.

Economic and Political Section

The main sources of the economic news were related to free trade agreements (FTA). Unions for youth and women employment and corporate sources were also prominently featured. President “Park Geun-hye” (24 in total), who emphasized economic development by Korean nurses dispatched to Germany in the 1960s and 1970s, played a pivotal role as the primary source of economic development. During the COVID-19 pandemic, local governments became important in the economic sector.

Regarding the political section, the main sources have traditionally been the president and politicians affiliated with major political parties (ie, Ha Tae-keung, 79 in total). In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, these sources emerged as a major source, as President “Moon Jae-in” (577 in total) engaged in a verbal dispute over a post on Facebook that praised the diligent efforts of nurses.

Semantic Network Analysis: News Source-Topic Network Analysis

A visualization of the news source-topic network for the top 50 topic words by health care source is shown in Figure 2 . The analysis revealed 15 common topic words that were prominent among nurses, doctors, and the MOHW. The top common terms encompassed general health-related topics such as “nurses,” “patients,” “medical staff,” and “hospitals.” Notably, pandemic-related topics like “COVID-19,” “MERS” “confirmed cases,” and “infectious diseases” also featured prominently as shared interests.

research article using nursing theory

“Nursing Bill” emerged as an issue of high interest among sources from the nursing and doctor groups although the topic did not garner significant attention from MOHW sources. Interestingly, both doctors and MOHW sources exhibited common interests in “the Medical Act” and “amendments,” although nurses mentioned the Medical Act less frequently. Moreover, the nurse group and MOHW sources shared a major concern with regard to the “community,” indicating a consensus on the importance of expanding public health care in the community.

Nurses demonstrated a distinct interest in education-related themes, such as “students” and “nursing department,” as well as concerns regarding poor working conditions, including “protective clothing” and “working environment.” Additionally, professional pride was evident through terms like “sense of mission” and “nightingale.” Unfortunately, workplace harassment, represented by the term “burning,” has emerged as an important issue for nurses.

Conversely, physician sources displayed a particular interest in “operating room” and “closed-circuit television (CCTV).” Doctors voiced opposition to the implementation of closed-circuit television surveillance in operating rooms to prevent medical errors. Furthermore, they expressed concerns about “telemedicine” and “Oriental medicine,” fearing potential infringement of doctors’ status. Their apprehension lies in the possibility that nondoctor medical practitioners, such as nurses and herbalists, may perform medical treatments and thereby exclude doctors through telemedicine platforms.

Social Sections

The timeline and main topics of interest in articles related to nurses are detailed in Multimedia Appendix 6 . Nurses have been portrayed in many ways in the social sector, and these portrayals have encompassed various roles that range from heroes to workers to survivors of abuse and even to perpetrators.

Nurses have been portrayed as heroes and dedicated nightingales who have been fighting at the frontlines of epidemic prevention to stop the spread of various infectious diseases—from swine flu and MERS to COVID-19. Such portrayals frequently emphasize courage, compassion, and dedication [ 1 ]. Besides their role in epidemic prevention, nurses’ heroic images extend beyond this domain and encompass their initial responses to various mass casualty incidents. An illustrative example is the Itaewon tragedy of 2022, wherein the remarkable efforts of nurses were at the forefront. One nurse said, “I think I performed CPR so extensively that I lost count of the number of individuals I attended to” [ 21 ].

Beyond this heroic image, other reports have emerged which indicate that nurses face unfavorable working conditions like those of laborers. These conditions are characterized by excessive workloads, inadequate compensation, and lack of recognition of their invaluable contributions. Nurses’ voices in the social media coverage extend beyond merely conveying the difficulties associated with nursing work. Furthermore, nurses serve as valuable sources who articulate calls for policy alternatives or provide evaluations of existing policies. This multifaceted portrayal of nurses, which highlights their roles as workers, experts, and heroes, is observed both in the national and international media [ 22 , 23 ].

Furthermore, nurses appeared in the media as suspects or perpetrators of medical accidents, such as the death of a newborn at Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital in 2017, and as key sources in cases involving surrogate doctors. However, nurses are not responsible for medical errors and are described as enforcers who function under the supervision of hospitals and doctors.

Nurses have progressed beyond communicating difficulties in the nursing workplace and whistleblowing incidents to initiating calls for policy alternatives and evaluating ongoing policies in media reports. In particular, the Korean Nursing Association emerged as a major source, besides nurses, when discussions of the Nursing Care Act began to be earnestly covered in the media. Simultaneously, the Korean Medical Association strongly opposed the nursing law.

Local Sections

In the local section, there was further emphasis on poor health care and working conditions, which were revealed in the social section. Primary sources associated with “hospitals” have voiced concern with regard to the challenges that are encountered within local health care facilities, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged regions. Throughout different infectious disease outbreaks, including the pandemic, MERS, and COVID-19, the focal points of the discussion included the burdensome workloads imposed on nurses, inadequate staffing levels, and insufficient resources, including facilities and equipment.

This situation underscores the need for an expanded role of nurses within the community, greater recognition of the nursing profession, and enhanced public awareness of health care issues. Public and governmental sources, such as the MOHW, nursing organizations, and unions, have advocated the need for increased investment in public health care. The provision of health care services based solely on market principles is limited to regions characterized by smaller populations and relatively lower incomes. Consequently, the government has endeavored to fortify local public health care by emphasizing national university hospitals and public health centers as central hubs.

Various measures have been pursued to achieve the above-described goal. These measures include legislative initiatives for the establishment of community and professional nurse-systems, as well as the expansion and reinforcement of the nursing profession’s role through mechanisms such as the nursing grade system and the expansion of nursing schools. Moreover, public support has been provided to bolster these efforts. Although it is acknowledged that challenges, including trial and error, disagreements within the nursing profession, and conflicts with other health care organizations, such as the Korean Medical Association, have emerged during this process, the media generally presents the strengthening of local public health care as being a step toward aligning with the enhanced status of the nursing profession.

In the case of the closure of Jinju Public Medical Center in 2013 and the health care union’s call for a general strike in 2021, “unions” appear as the main source of information, calling for the strengthening of public health care. The nursing profession, along with various sources from government departments, such as the MOHW, emphasizes the need to bolster public health care in local media discourse. Media reports portray the government as actively seeking to fortify local public health care with a focus on local university hospitals and public health centers. Specifically, various policies were mentioned, such as the introduction of nurse practitioners, visiting nurses, dispatch nurses, nurses in training, part-time nurses, comprehensive nursing services, a nursing grading system, more nursing schools, and public health nurses. These policies aim to improve the local health care environment by expanding and strengthening the roles of nurses and providing public support.

Economy Sections

Between 2005 and 2007, the opening of the health care market emerged as a significant economic agenda within the context of the Korea-US FTA. Consequently, notable figures such as Kim Jong-hoon, who was the Korea’s chief representative in the US-Korea FTA; Kim Hyun-Jong, who served as the head of the Trade Negotiations Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Wendy Cutler, who was the US chief representative, became a key source in the economy section of the media.

Unions represent another significant source in the economic sector, particularly in relation to the interests of nurses. Various unions, including major hospital unions, the National Healthcare Workers’ Union, the Democratic Trade Union Confederation (to which the National Healthcare Workers’ Union is affiliated), and the Public Transport Workers’ Union Medical Solidarity Headquarters (affiliated to the Public Transport Workers’ Union) have been actively engaged in shaping the discourse on nurses’ issues within the broader framework of labor concerns. These unions shed light on key topics, such as insufficient nurse recruitment, the growing trend of casualization through the introduction of part-time work, and substandard working conditions for women employees. The sources from the “union” sector on the economy section of the media provide valuable insights that reflect a broader sense of solidarity with the collective of nurses.

In addition to the heroic portrayal of nurses during the pandemic, the use of nurse imagery in economic development is observed, as exemplified by the depiction of the “Korean nurses in West Germany” as an economic development hero. President Park Geun-hye has associated the concepts of “Korean nurses to West Germany,” along with “Korean miners to West Germany” and “Middle Eastern construction workers,” with overseas employment initiatives that are aimed at combatting youth unemployment and interlinking nurses within the economic policy direction.

Political Sections

Politicians from major parties and heads of government ministries, including Moon Jae-in, have emerged as key sources. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, President Moon found himself amid a controversy. The president is expected to express gratitude to the health care workers, particularly nurses, doctors, and pharmacists.

His emphasis on the nurses’ hard work became a point of political contention. A notable example was the 2020 controversy surrounding the division of medical staff at a time when doctors were on strike to protest the government’s plans to increase the number of seats in public medical schools and establish new public medical schools. On September 2, 2020, President Moon wrote a Facebook post stating, “Nurses are silently guarding medical sites where doctors, including specialists, have left,” and highlighting that the majority of medical staff referred to as “doctors” were actually nurses. These statements drew criticism from members of the opposite People’s Power Party, such as the representative Ha Tae-kyung and spokesperson Kim Eun-hye, who accused President Moon of dividing the medical staff based on their profession. In contrast, the ruling Democratic Party of Korea and representative Ko Goo-jung refuted the division of the medical staff frame and countered that it was the People’s Power Party that created a division between the government and medical staff. Furthermore, debates surrounding the authorship of Facebook posts added another layer of controversy to the situation.

In the political section, the news articles featured a range of stakeholders, including the nursing community, who voiced their perspectives on the Nursing Bill. However, rather than providing an in-depth analysis of the policy’s specific content, media coverage has primarily emphasized the conflict between nurses and doctors with regard to the enactment of the bill, as well as the debates between President Moon Jae-in and the opposition parties.

The increased media attention on the nursing law enactment began in earnest under President Moon Jae-in’s administration after the COVID-19 pandemic, and the controversy surrounding the enactment of the nursing law that represented the ongoing conflict between the Korean Nurses Association and the Korean Medical Association has also received significant attention. The conflict over the Nursing Bill was manifested in various ways, such as the resolution of a general strike by nurses in 2021 and the boycott of the national nursing examination in 2022. The strategies used by nurses in their struggle, which encompassed labor disputes with unions and profession-wide refusal to participate in the national examination, reflect the dual nature of their roles as both workers and professionals.

Following the public’s widespread recognition and support for the dedicated efforts of nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Nursing Bill has resurfaced as an important issue that has led both the major presidential candidates in the 2022 election to pledge their commitment toward enacting nursing legislation. However, a divergence in approach has become apparent, with the newly elected People’s Power Party expressing caution following internal disagreements. Contrarily, the Democratic Party affirmed its intent to pursue the enactment of the nursing legislation. This eventually resulted in the president vetoing the legislation that had been passed by the opposition-led National Assembly in 2023.

Principal Findings

This study focused on analyzing media coverage of the nursing agenda in South Korea over an 18-year period starting in 2005 and examined the coverage patterns, sources responsible for reporting, and quotes in articles, both annually and across different sections. To achieve this objective, a large data set comprising nurse-related articles from BigKinds was used.

In sum, 128,339 articles from 54 media outlets on nursing-related issues were analyzed. The news was mainly covered in social and local sections. According to news source network analysis, 445 main sources who had made the top 20 list at least once by year and section were selected. Multimedia Appendices 2 - 5 show the top 20 sources by year and section.

The news source-topic network analysis highlights nursing legislation as a common concern for intense conflict between doctors and nurses. The “Nursing Bill” emerged as a common interest among nurses and doctors although the topic did not garner considerable attention from the MOHW.

This study aimed to examine the drivers of the social, local, economic, and political agendas emphasized in the media by the analysis of main sources and their quotes. In the social section, various issues were covered, including the COVID-19 response, workplace bullying, and nursing bills. On the local level, poor working conditions and strengthening public health care were key issues. Considering the economic aspect, labor issues and overseas work were hot topics. On the political aspect, conflicts between nurses and doctors over the nursing bills and the resulting controversy were crucial. This study revealed the media’s evolving portrayal of nurses over time. Nurses are portrayed in various roles, such as heroes, workers, survivors of abuse, and even perpetrators, across different topics covered by the media. Nonetheless, in the economic and political spheres, nurses’ voices tend to diminish. Media coverage of the enactment of nursing laws tends to move on confrontations between political parties.

Comparison to Prior Work

Aber and Hawkins [ 24 ] undertook a comprehensive examination of advertisements featured in medical and nursing journals. Their findings elucidated a prevailing depiction of nurses in print media, where they were predominantly portrayed as ornamental figures, sexualized objects, or ancillaries to doctors. Hoyle et al [ 25 ] embarked on a comprehensive exploration of nurses’ perceptions regarding the media’s influence on the public understanding of the nursing profession. They discerned recurrent themes, notably the media’s negative portrayal of the nursing profession—a sentiment echoed in other studies [ 26 ]. In contrast, the severe acute respiratory syndrome crisis served as a crucial juncture in the media representation of nurses, akin to the role of the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea [ 9 , 10 , 27 ]. These preceding studies have demonstrated the media’s paramount influence in shaping societal perceptions of nursing.

Our study underscores a more dynamic evolution of media portrayals pertaining to nurses. During health crises, the media consistently lionized nurses, portraying them as the unsung heroes on the frontlines. However, media portrayals of nurses have undergone fundamental transformations, mirroring the societal evolutions and the multifaceted challenges encountered by the nursing fraternity. With South Korea confronting the challenges of an aging demographic, there is an evident amplification in nurses’ community-based responsibilities. This evolution signifies a transition from a traditionally passive representation to a more proactive and central role transcending their conventional subordinate position relative to doctors.

Media coverage can influence not only the image of nurses but also their working conditions, the structure of the health care workforce, and the legislative process [ 8 , 26 , 28 ]. The paradigm shift in the media agenda has precipitated heightened political and juridical tensions between the medical and nursing professions. Conflicts between health care professionals, as evidenced by the political dimension analysis, can impede policymaking and result in policy confusion due to politicization. Previous instances of policy confusion within the health care community, including health insurance integration, medical division of labor, insurance finance policy, and reimbursement policy, have been attributed to conflicting interests and backlash from targeted groups [ 29 , 30 ]. Moreover, these factors have been reflected in the media representations.


This study provides a comprehensive analysis of media coverage of nurses over an 18-year period since 2005, with a focus on the sources. However, this study has several limitations.

First, the study analyzed only major newspapers and broadcast media that are listed on BigKinds, which means that data from health care journals that were not included in BigKinds could not be analyzed. Future research could compare agenda-related differences between the mass media and health care professional journals to explore how variations in general and public agendas influence policy agendas. Additionally, it would be valuable to examine discussions on platforms, such as Twitter and blogs, to capture a broader range of perspectives.

Second, as this study’s analysis was based on all articles containing the keyword “nurses,” this strategy limited the ability to descriptively delve into specific agendas. A follow-up study could focus on analyzing a specific agenda, such as the Nursing Bill, over an extended timeframe to gain a more nuanced understanding of policymaking through media channels.

Third, this study implies that health care policy is not solely based on scientific advancements or socioeconomic justifications but is inherently political. Strategic media outreach and policy research are necessary to elucidate policy directions that nursing communities aim to pursue.


This study used a combination of NLP and semantic network analyses to examine how nurse-related issues were covered by the media, specifically focusing on sources and quotes. The media plays a crucial role in highlighting various aspects of nursing practice and nurses, thereby contributing to political engagement and policy activism. However, policy formulation processes to solve nursing issues have not been adequately reported in South Korea.

When engaging with the media to promote nursing policy, it is crucial to navigate the politicization of issues and focus on how policy matters are prioritized on the agenda. As advocates for public health, nurses are responsible for actively engaging in legislative and policymaking processes from a political standpoint [ 31 - 33 ]. However, nurses may not fully realize the extent to which nursing practice relies on public policy decisions and their potential to shape those decisions [ 34 , 35 ]. Nurses should participate in various activities at different levels, such as attending public forums and giving media interviews, to voice their professional views and positions as advocates [ 36 , 37 ]. Nurses need political competence to address the broader determinants of health, effectively intervene in culturally diverse societies, collaborate in developing humane health care systems, and bring nursing values to policy discussions [ 38 ].


This study was supported by the SunMoon University Research Grant in 2021 (Number 2022-007). The authors used ChatGPT and DeepL for the initial English translation.

Data Availability

Data are not available to share due to Department of Veterans Affairs and ethical retractions; however, annotation instructions and vocabulary are available upon request..

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization and methodology were developed by DP. Data curation and analysis tasks were performed by DP. DP secured funding for the project. The investigation involved DP, AHP, and DK. Project administration and supervision were handled by DP, AHP, and DK. Resources and software management were under the purview of DP. Validation was conducted by DP, AHP, and DK. Visualization tasks were executed by DP. Writing of the original draft and review and editing were collaborative efforts involving DP, AHP, and DK.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

The size, number of edges, and density of 72 news source networks.

Top 20 news sources by year in the social section.

Top 20 news sources by year in the local section.

Top 20 news sources by year in the economy section.

Top 20 news sources by year in the political section.

The timeline and main agenda in nurse articles.

  • An J. Analysis of image of nurses on articles in Korean daily newspapers after Corona pandemic. J Convergence Cult Technol. 2021;7:66-74. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Park K, Kwon M. The awareness of nursing students on nursing law legislation in Korea. J Korean Assn Learn Cent Curric Instr. 2018;18(11):1-18. doi: 10.22251/jlcci.2018.18.11.1. [ CrossRef ]
  • Lee HJ, Kang HS. The perceptions of nurses and nursing students on nursing law legislation in Korea. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2006;12:355-364. [ FREE Full text ]
  • McCombs ME, Shaw DL. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opin Quart. 1972;36:176-187. [ CrossRef ]
  • Iyengar S, Simon A. News coverage of the gulf crisis and public opinion. Commun Res. 1993;20(3):365-383. [ CrossRef ]
  • Kato M, Yoshimatsu F, Saito T. Trends in media coverage during the monkeypox outbreak: content analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e45787. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Huang M, ElTayeby O, Zolnoori M, Yao L. Public opinions toward diseases: infodemiological study on news media data. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(5):e10047. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Chin YR, Kwon MH. Contents analysis on the media about the working conditions of nurses. J Korea Soc Comput Inf. 2021;26:109-117. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Park MY, Jeong SH, Kim HS, Lee EJ. [Images of nurses appeared in media reports before and after outbreak of COVID-19: text network analysis and topic modeling]. J Korean Acad Nurs. Jun 2022;52(3):291-307. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Baek SM, Park M. Analysis of headline news about nurses before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2022;28(4):319-330. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Yun EK, Kim JO, Byun HM, Lee GG. [Topic modeling and keyword network analysis of news articles related to nurses before and after "the Thanks to You Challenge" during the COVID-19 pandemic]. J Korean Acad Nurs. Aug 2021;51(4):442-453. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Mason DJ, Nixon L, Glickstein B, Han S, Westphaln K, Carter L. The Woodhull Study revisited: nurses' representation in health news media 20 years later. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018;50(6):695-704. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Sigma Theta Tau International. The Woodhull Study on Nursing and The Media: Health Care's Invisible Partner. Indianapolis, IN. Center Nursing Press; 1997.
  • de Melo T, Figueiredo CMS. Comparing news articles and tweets about COVID-19 in Brazil: sentiment analysis and topic modeling approach. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021;7(2):e24585. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • BigKinds. URL: https://www.bigkinds.or.kr/ [accessed 2023-03-05]
  • Park D, Lee H, Jeong SH. Production and correction of misinformation about fine dust in the Korean news media: a big data analysis of news from 2009 to 2019. American Behavioral Scientist. Aug 26, 2022.:000276422211182. [ CrossRef ]
  • Stephens L. Book review: deciding what's news: a study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, newsweek and time. Newspaper Res J. Aug 01, 2016;2(2):72-73. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Blanchard RO, Cantor MG, Sigal LV. Reporters and officials: the organization and politics of newsmaking. Contemp Sociol. Jan 1976;5(1):47. [ CrossRef ]
  • Van Dijk TA. News as Discourse. New York, NY. Routledge; 2013.
  • SNAnalyzer. URL: https://bit.ly/47esex6 [accessed 2023-03-05]
  • Baek M. Carrying the patient, CPR all night until the knee bleeds... "little heroes save lives". Seoul Shinmun. 2022. URL: https://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20221031004006 [accessed 2023-07-05]
  • Mason DJ, Glickstein B, Westphaln K. Journalists' experiences with using nurses as sources in health news stories. Am J Nurs. Oct 2018;118(10):42-50. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Mohammed S, Peter E, Killackey T, Maciver J. The "nurse as hero" discourse in the COVID-19 pandemic: a poststructural discourse analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. May 2021;117:103887. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Aber CS, Hawkins JW. Portrayal of nurses in advertisements in medical and nursing journals. Image J Nurs Sch. 1992;24(4):289-293. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hoyle LP, Kyle RG, Mahoney C. Nurses’ views on the impact of mass media on the public perception of nursing and nurse–service user interactions. J Res Nurs. Nov 15, 2017;22(8):586-596. [ CrossRef ]
  • Girvin J, Jackson D, Hutchinson M. Contemporary public perceptions of nursing: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the international research evidence. J Nurs Manag. Nov 2016;24(8):994-1006. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hall LM, Angus J, Peter E, O'Brien-Pallas L, Wynn F, Donner G. Media portrayal of nurses' perspectives and concerns in the SARS crisis in Toronto. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2003;35(3):211-216. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Gill J, Baker C. The power of mass media and feminism in the evolution of nursing's image: a critical review of the literature and implications for nursing practice. J Med Humanit. Sep 2021;42(3):371-386. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Kim YJ, Park GJ, Moon JW, Lee HYMC. Policy in Nursing and Healthcare. Seoul, South Korea. Gyechuk Munhwasa; 2018.
  • Campos PA, Reich MR. Political analysis for health policy implementation. Health Syst Reform. 2019;5(3):224-235. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Moon J. Health Policy. 3rd Edition. Seoul, South Korea. Gyechuk Munwhasa; 2013;299-321.
  • Boswell C, Cannon S, Miller J. Nurses' political involvement: responsibility versus privilege. J Prof Nurs. 2005;21(1):5-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Des Jardin K. Political involvement in nursing--politics, ethics, and strategic action. AORN J. Nov 2001;74(5):614-8, 621. [ Medline ]
  • Salvage J, White J. Nursing leadership and health policy: everybody's business. Int Nurs Rev. Jun 2019;66(2):147-150. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Buck-McFadyen E, MacDonnell J. Contested practice: political activism in nursing and implications for nursing education. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. Jul 27, 2017;14(1):20160026. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Wilson DM, Underwood L, Kim S, Olukotun M, Errasti-Ibarrondo B. How and why nurses became involved in politics or political action, and the outcomes or impacts of this involvement. Nurs Outlook. 2022;70(1):55-63. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Baumann SL, Shaw HK. Improving global health and nursing's international influence. Nurs Sci Q. Jul 2022;35(3):368-373. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Suhd-Brondstatter J. From nurse to politician: nurses who left the bedside for public policy [thesis]. University of California, Davis. 2021. URL: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/58b1b3gh [accessed 2023-07-05]


Edited by T Leung; submitted 03.07.23; peer-reviewed by J Delgado-Ron, C Zhao, S Pesälä; comments to author 19.10.23; revised version received 09.11.23; accepted 21.02.24; published 19.03.24.

©Daemin Park, Dasom Kim, Ah-hyun Park. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 19.03.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • HHS Author Manuscripts

Logo of nihpa

The Evolution of Nursing Research

Jacqueline m. stolley.

Trinity College of Nursing, Moline, Illinois

THE RESEARCH CULTURE in nursing has evolved in the last 150 years, beginning with Nightingale’s work in the mid-1850s and culminating in the creation of the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) at the National Institues of Health (NIH). This article highlights nursing’s efforts to facilitate the growth of the research culture by developing theory, establishing the importance of a research-based practice, advancing education, and providing avenues for dissemination of research. Similarities with the chiropractic profession are discussed, along with a commentary by Cheryl Hawk, D.C, Ph.D.


The development of a research culture in nursing in many ways parallels that of chiropractic, and by reviewing key aspects of the evolution of the science of nursing, there are lessons to be learned, and mistakes to be avoided. Nursing research has changed dramatically in the past 150 years, beginning with Florence Nightingale in the 19th century. Clearly, nursing research has not always had the influence and significance it holds today. In fact, for a number of years after Nightingale’s work, little is found in the literature concerning nursing research. This is perhaps due to the past perception of nursing as an apprenticeship in a task-oriented caring profession ( 1 ). Although research was conducted with respect to nursing education and administration in the first half of the 20th century, it was not until the 1950s that nursing research began the advancement that has been seen in the past three decades. This is due to many factors: an increase in the number of nurses with advanced academic preparation, the establishment of vehicles for dissemination of nursing research, federal funding and support for nursing research, and the upgrading of research skills in faculty and students. This article provides a brief review of the development of research in nursing, and along with it, the theory that has guided that process.


As with other practice professions, nursing requires a knowledge foundation that is based on theory and derived from systematic research. The first nursing theorist, Florence Nightingale, created detailed reports of both medical and nursing matters as chief nurse for the British in the Crimean War in the mid-1850s. Nightingale noted that “… apprehension, uncertainty, waiting, expectation, fear of surprise, do a patient more harm than any exertion” (p. 6) ( 2 ). As a result, Nightingale’s conceptualization of nursing included the need to have an understanding of the laws of nature, the prevention of disease, and the use of personal power. She viewed persons as both physical and spiritual beings, emphasizing the importance of the environment and the need to care for the patient, not the disease. With her emphasis on the environment, changes in nutrition, hydration, and sanitation resulted, and mortality rates dropped drastically during the Crimean War ( 3 ). In subsequent years, Nightingale developed “laws of nursing” that formed the basis for nursing science and guided nursing education in the United States from 1850 to the 1950s ( 4 ).

In the 1960s, nursing theory was used to guide teaching rather than research or practice. This was a natural outgrowth of nursing’s earlier focus on education and professional identity. Additionally, the National League for Nursing (the professional accrediting body) stipulated a conceptual framework for curriculum. Paradigmatic concepts integral to nursing were identified as person, environment, health , and nursing ( 5 – 7 ), and scientific energies were spent developing curriculum that corresponded to existing theories ( 7 ). At this point in time, nurse educators began to urge students to “care for the whole person” and textbooks underscored the importance of “holism” in nursing, with subtitles such as “The Biopsychosocial Approach.” Nurse authors acknowledged multiple causality in human illness, but all too often research, curricula, and textbooks reflected linear cause-and-effect models rather than multivariate approaches.

The 1950s and 1960s saw the development of theories explaining the art and science of nursing. Hildegard Peplau published Interpersonal Relations in Nursing ( 8 ) in 1952, based on her work as a psychiatric nurse. Other theories. included Levine’s Conservation Principles of Nursing ( 9 ) in, 1967; Roger’s Introduction to the Theoretical Basis of Nursing ( 10 ) in 1970, and The Science of Unitary Man ( 11 ) in 1980, followed by The Science of Unitary Human Beings, a Paradigm for Nursing ( 12 ) in 1983. Imogene King published A Theory for Nursing: Systems, Concepts, Process ( 13 ) in 1981, and Sister Calista Roy published her adaptation model ( 14 ) in 1980. These “grand” theories were complex and key concepts were hard to measure empirically. Thus it was difficult to test these early nursing theories through research. With the emphasis on clinical nursing research, the recent trend has been to develop and test midrange theories that describe patient problems and nursing practice.


In 1859, Nightingale used the battlefield hospitals of the Crimean War as her research laboratory, using an epidemiological process to describe the morbidity and mortality of sick and injured soldiers. Her pioneering epidemiological research and statistical methodology (documenting the relationship between the environment and health status of soldiers) was the hallmark of scientific investigation in nursing ( 4 , 15 ).

An historical review from 1900 to 1949 reveals that nursing research in the United States (see Table 1 ) was in its infancy, focusing on nursing education, nurses, nursing students, and ways to organize nurses’ work. As noted earlier, at this time, nursing theory was discussed solely as a means of developing and organizing educational curriculum. Early educators were unable to develop educational programs that both represented a nursing perspective and helped students focus on nursing concepts and problems rather than medical concepts and problems. In the first half of this century, groups were formed to answer such questions as: what is nursing, what do nurses do, and how unique is nursing from other health science disciplines? Professional debates raged as to whether nursing was merely a “poor stepsister” of medicine or whether it was part of the biological, natural, or physical sciences ( 4 ). Research during this period was essentially nonexistent in terms of nursing practice.

Nursing: Historical Developments in Nursing Theory and Research

It was not until the 1980s that nursing devoted a sizeable portion of its research effort to patients and patient behavior, an emphasis that emerged logically as nurses began to recognize the interplay between behavior and rehabilitation or recovery from illness. Historically, nurses searched for single causative agents when promoting health or preventing illness, even as they acknowledged the contributions of multiple other factors. Predominant modes of inquiry relied on early in the development of a culture of nursing research were empirical (logical positivist). Nurse researchers modeled themselves after colleagues in the basic and biomedical sciences, perhaps in an effort to seek scientific validation. Only during the 1980s and 1990s did nurses increasingly use qualitative research methods, such as phenomenology and ethnography, to explain complex human phenomena. Therefore, nurse researchers are just beginning to respond to the need to view human problems in less reductionistic terms when the research questions call for a holistic combination of quantitative and qualitative research methodologies ( 16 ). Over the past two decades, many nurses have pursued further education, consultation, or research to enhance their understanding and ability to respond constructively to patient behavior. For example, by the mid-1980s, there was a sizable increase in nursing studies of individuals and families experiencing developmental, environmental, or illness-generated crisis situations involving both acute and long-term stress responses ( 17 – 20 ).

During the 1990s, nursing practice underwent a clinical revolution in response to societal, medical, scientific, and technologic advances. Changes in nursing practice began to result from nursing research (e.g., research-based practice guidelines) as the efforts of individuals both in and outside of nursing (e.g., National Academy of Science, National Institute for Nursing Research, and major foundations) coalesced to stimulate and support clinical nursing research. Concurrently, there was a new surge of interest among nurses themselves in redefining the problems of their practice and delineating the gaps in knowledge underpinning their practice base. As noted earlier, the current decade has been marked by interest in multiple modes of inquiry (qualitative and quantitative) for a practice discipline which must address complex human phenomena. In the past, the type of research questions most often addressed through nursing research were of a descriptive or exploratory nature. However, nurse researchers are now going beyond “what is” and “how” questions and are addressing more explanatory or predictive-level questions using methodologically rigorous experimental and quasi-experimental designs as they redefine clinical problems and systematically address gaps in their knowledge base. After becoming established in the research arena, nursing researchers have expanded to incorporate and collaborate on interdisciplinary studies, health care systems and health services research, and taxonomies such as Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC) ( 21 ) and Nursing Outcomes Classification (NOC) ( 22 ). The taxonomies represent efforts to define what nurses do and outcomes sensitive to nursing interventions.

The culture of nursing research has now advanced to the point where consideration can be given not just to the conduct of research, but also to its application in practice. The conduct of research is not the end, but rather a means through which practice is improved by utilizing research findings. Research utilization is the process of conveying and applying research-based knowledge to impact or change existing practices in the health care system ( 23 ). The primary components of research utilization involve summarizing knowledge generated through research; imparting the research knowledge to nurses, other health professionals, policymakers, and consumers of health care; and accomplishing desired outcomes for patients, their families, and health care providers and agencies. Models for research utilization were developed in the 1970s, beginning with the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education in Nursing (WCHEN) Regional Program for Nursing Development ( 24 ). Other models include the Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing (CURN) project ( 25 ), the Stetler/Marram model ( 26 ), the retrieval and application of research in nursing (RARIN) model ( 27 ) and the Iowa model of research in practice ( 28 ). The primary goal of research utilization programs is to make research findings an integral part of nursing practice, assuring research-based care delivery models. Research utilization is an excellent model for application of research findings to practice by advanced practice nurses.

An important trend is the use of research findings to serve as the basis for treatment decision making called evidence-based practice ( 29 ). Using this process, a question involving treatment is developed, and determination of the adequacy of current research is made. If the research base is adequate, it is synthesized, protocols are developed and applied, and evaluation is completed. Through these efforts, the nursing profession, in partnership with other professions, bridges the gap between research and practice to improve patient care.


Early nursing education took place in hospital training programs (nursing diploma), modeled on Florence Nightingale’s work in the United Kingdom ( 30 ). In 1915, nursing’s educational accrediting body, the National League for Nursing (NLN) called for university-level education. Baccalaureate programs in nursing emerged in 1923 at Yale University and Western Reserve University, but the majority of nursing education took place in hospital-based diploma programs. In 1971, the first community college programs for nursing education opened, providing graduates with an associate degree in nursing. Today, entry into nursing practice takes place primarily in associate degree programs, with baccalaureate programs second. Gradually, diploma programs have decreased in number, and few exist today. Associate degree programs may introduce nursing students to research, but baccalaureate programs included nursing research in the upper division curriculum. From 1900 to the 1960s, most nursing leaders obtained their graduate-level preparation in schools of education ( 30 ). For many years, the Master’s degree was considered the terminal degree in nursing.

The number of nurses whose career was devoted to research was miniscule in the 1960s. Indeed, even by the 1970s only about 400 nurses in the United States held a doctoral degree ( 31 ). In 1955, the Nursing Research Grants and Fellowship Program of the Division of Nursing, United States Public Health Service (USPHS) was established. This program awarded grants for nursing research projects, nursing research fellowships, and nurse-scientist graduate training ( 32 ). Early funding was for nurses to obtain their doctorates in fields outside of nursing, because there were no nursing doctoral programs available. As a result, nurse-physiologists, nurse-anthropologists, and so forth emerged in the field. They were educated to conduct research, but often stayed in the field of their doctorate and did not apply their research efforts to nursing care problems.The emphasis during this period continued to be on establishing nursing’s rightful place in the academic setting of the university. As nursing became integrated into university life during the 1970s, nursing faculty became aware of their responsibility to develop new knowledge, and in many university-based schools of nursing, faculty members began to prepare both themselves and their students to become investigators ( 33 ).

Currently, three types of doctoral degrees in nursing are available. A Nursing Doctorate (ND), first established at Case Western Reserve University in 1979, was designed to be equivalent to the Doctor of Medicine degree, providing students preparation for the practice of generalized nursing and future leadership, but not for advanced practice. Professional doctorates, Doctor of Nursing Science (DNS, DNSc, DSN), emphasized advanced clinical, administrative, or policy-related practice and leadership. The Doctor of Nursing Science degree focuses on applied rather than basic research, and on applying and testing new knowledge in practice. Although the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) was first available to nurses at Teachers College at Columbia University in the 1920s, interest in doctoral education was rekindled in the 1970s. The number of doctoral programs in nursing has increased from zero in the 1950s to over 65 institutions, three-fourths of which are academic doctorates (PhD) that prepare graduates for a lifetime of scholarship and research ( 34 ). More recently, nurses in academic settings have been encouraged to obtain postdoctoral research training with support available through both individual (F32) and institutional (T32) traineeships through the National Institutes of Health (NIH).


Several factors stimulated the growth of nursing research in the 1980s and 1990s. Perhaps the most important factor was the creation in 1986 of the National Center for Nursing Research (NCNR) in the United States Public Health Service (USPHS). The development of this Center resulted from intense political action by the American Nurses’ Association (ANA) ( 23 ). The primary aim of the NCNR was “the conduct, support, and dissemination of information regarding basic and clinical nursing research, training and other programs in patient care research” (p. 2) ( 35 ). Prior to the establishment of the NCNR, most of the federal funds supporting research were designated for medical studies that concentrated on the diagnosis and cure of disease. Thus, creation of the NCNR was a major achievement for nurse researchers. In 1993, the NCNR became the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), strengthening nursing’s position by giving the Center institute status within the NIH. This advance served to put nursing into the mainstream of research activities and on more equal status with scientists and other health professions. With the establishment of the Center and then the Institute, federal funding for nursing research has grown. In 1986, the NCNR had a budget of $16.2 million. In 1996, the budget for the NINR was about $55 million ( 1 ), more than a threefold increase over a decade. The NINR elected to foster five research priorities for 1995 through 1999: community-based nursing models, effectiveness of nursing interventions in HIV/AIDS, cognitive impairment, living with chronic illness, and biobehavioral factors related to immunocompetence ( 22 ).

The NINR’s strategic plan for the next millenium includes funding nursing research on chronic illnesses (e.g., improving adherence to chemotherapy, pain relief), quality and cost effectiveness of care, health promotion and disease prevention, management of symptoms (e.g., gender differences in response to therapeutics, managing the pain cycle), health disparities (e.g., cultural sensitivity), adaptation to new technologies (e.g., transplants), and palliative care at the end of life. Special allocations and Requests for Applications (RFA) have facilitated research in these target areas, although investigator-initiated research topics are funded if they are significant to nursing or patient care. The projected budget for NINR for the year 2000 is over $70 million, which is approximately distributed as follows: 73% for extramural research project grants; 8% for pre- and postdoctoral training; 3.5% for career development; 3.5% for Core Centers in specialized areas of research inquiry; 3% for the intramural program. Planning research for the next 5 years and into the next century is a welcome challenge for the NINR and the scientific community ( 36 ).


Significant milestones in the development of nursing science began in the mid-1950s (see Table 1 ). From 1950 to 1959, there was growing emphasis on the need to identify a body of knowledge for the developing profession of nursing in order to justify its presence in post-World War II universities ( 37 ). Not only was the first journal of Nursing Research established in 1952; several textbooks related to nursing research were also published. Another critical step in the evolution of the culture of nursing science was the establishment of the American Nurses Foundation by the American Nurses Association specifically to promote nursing research. During the 1950s, regional research conferences were instituted for the first time, and federal support of nursing research began ( 4 , 33 , 37 ). All these elements were essential to the development of a science of nursing.

Several new nursing research journals, including Applied Nursing Research (ANR), were instituted in the late 1980s. ANR publishes research reports of special significance to nurse clinicians ( 1 ). Increasingly, clinical specialty (i.e., Heart and Lung, Journal of Gerontological Nursing ) journals are publishing data-based articles as well.

Another important event in the development and dissemination of nursing theory and research was the creation of the Annual Review of Nursing Research in 1983. This publication includes critical analyses of research pertinent to nursing and health, including nursing practice, nursing care delivery, nursing education, and the nursing profession. Chapters systematically assess knowledge development in nursing, encourage the use of research findings in practice, and provide direction for future research ( 22 ). More recently, scholars have joined to create the Encyclopedia of Nursing Research ( 38 ), a publication that provides a comprehensive overview of research studies, the history of nursing research, and the evolution of theory development in nursing.

The next century challenges nursing research with critical imperatives for improving health care. Changes in our nation’s population and their needs and expectations will impact the direction of nursing research. Consumers are becoming more involved in managing their own health care, and practitioners are continually adjusting to new technologies as well as innovative health care systems. The broad spectrum of nursing research encompasses both clinical and basic investigations with the patient as the central focus. Nursing must concentrate on making certain that our valuable scientific findings are incorporated into practice and focus on developing the next generation of nurse researchers ( 36 ).

The research culture in chiropractic is similar to where nursing research was in its early years. To move chiropractic research forward will require many of the same changes that occurred in nursing, such as educational advancement, collaboration in academic settings, federal acknowledgement and support, and development of more avenues for research dissemination to practitioners. Just as nursing had to overcome significant barriers such as attitudes and low educational and professional status, so, too, will the chiropractic profession have to strive to develop a research tradition in order to integrate research as part of its practice culture.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 18.3.2024 in Vol 10 (2024)

Predicting COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Using a Small and Interpretable Set of Judgment and Demographic Variables: Cross-Sectional Cognitive Science Study

Authors of this article:

Author Orcid Image

Original Paper

  • Nicole L Vike 1 , PhD   ; 
  • Sumra Bari 1 , PhD   ; 
  • Leandros Stefanopoulos 2, 3 * , MSc   ; 
  • Shamal Lalvani 2 * , MSc   ; 
  • Byoung Woo Kim 1 * , MSc   ; 
  • Nicos Maglaveras 3 , PhD   ; 
  • Martin Block 4 , PhD   ; 
  • Hans C Breiter 1, 5 , MD   ; 
  • Aggelos K Katsaggelos 2, 6, 7 , PhD  

1 Department of Computer Science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States

2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States

3 School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

4 Integrated Marketing Communications, Medill School, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States

5 Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States

6 Department of Computer Science, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States

7 Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States

*these authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Hans C Breiter, MD

Department of Computer Science

University of Cincinnati

2901 Woodside Drive

Cincinnati, OH, 45219

United States

Phone: 1 617 413 0953

Email: [email protected]

Background: Despite COVID-19 vaccine mandates, many chose to forgo vaccination, raising questions about the psychology underlying how judgment affects these choices. Research shows that reward and aversion judgments are important for vaccination choice; however, no studies have integrated such cognitive science with machine learning to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake .

Objective: This study aims to determine the predictive power of a small but interpretable set of judgment variables using 3 machine learning algorithms to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake and interpret what profile of judgment variables was important for prediction.

Methods: We surveyed 3476 adults across the United States in December 2021. Participants answered demographic, COVID-19 vaccine uptake (ie, whether participants were fully vaccinated), and COVID-19 precaution questions. Participants also completed a picture-rating task using images from the International Affective Picture System. Images were rated on a Likert-type scale to calibrate the degree of liking and disliking. Ratings were computationally modeled using relative preference theory to produce a set of graphs for each participant (minimum R 2 >0.8). In total, 15 judgment features were extracted from these graphs, 2 being analogous to risk and loss aversion from behavioral economics. These judgment variables, along with demographics, were compared between those who were fully vaccinated and those who were not. In total, 3 machine learning approaches (random forest, balanced random forest [BRF], and logistic regression) were used to test how well judgment, demographic, and COVID-19 precaution variables predicted vaccine uptake . Mediation and moderation were implemented to assess statistical mechanisms underlying successful prediction.

Results: Age, income, marital status, employment status, ethnicity, educational level, and sex differed by vaccine uptake (Wilcoxon rank sum and chi-square P <.001). Most judgment variables also differed by vaccine uptake (Wilcoxon rank sum P <.05). A similar area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was achieved by the 3 machine learning frameworks, although random forest and logistic regression produced specificities between 30% and 38% (vs 74.2% for BRF), indicating a lower performance in predicting unvaccinated participants. BRF achieved high precision (87.8%) and AUROC (79%) with moderate to high accuracy (70.8%) and balanced recall (69.6%) and specificity (74.2%). It should be noted that, for BRF, the negative predictive value was <50% despite good specificity. For BRF and random forest, 63% to 75% of the feature importance came from the 15 judgment variables. Furthermore, age, income, and educational level mediated relationships between judgment variables and vaccine uptake .

Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the underlying importance of judgment variables for vaccine choice and uptake, suggesting that vaccine education and messaging might target varying judgment profiles to improve uptake. These methods could also be used to aid vaccine rollouts and health care preparedness by providing location-specific details (eg, identifying areas that may experience low vaccination and high hospitalization).


In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc worldwide, triggering rapid vaccine development efforts. Despite federal, state, and workplace vaccination mandates, many individuals made judgments against COVID-19 vaccination, leading researchers to study the psychology underlying individual vaccination preferences and what might differentiate the framework for judgment between individuals who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and those who were not (henceforth referred to as vaccine uptake ). A better understanding of these differences in judgment may highlight targets for public messaging and education to increase the incidence of choosing vaccination.

Multiple studies have sought to predict an individual’s intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine or specific variables underlying vaccination choices or mitigation strategies [ 1 - 7 ], but few have predicted vaccine uptake . One such study used 83 sociodemographic variables (with education, ethnicity, internet access, income, longitude, and latitude being the most important predictors) to predict vaccine uptake with 62% accuracy [ 8 ], confirming both the importance and limitations of these variables in prediction models. Other studies have compared demographic groups between vaccinated and nonvaccinated persons; Bulusu et al [ 9 ] found that young adults (aged 18-35 years), women, and those with higher levels of education had higher odds of being vaccinated. In a study of >12 million persons, the largest percentage of those who initiated COVID-19 vaccination were White, non-Hispanic women between the ages of 50 and 64 years [ 10 ]. Demographic variables are known to affect how individuals judge what is rewarding or aversive [ 11 , 12 ] yet are not themselves variables quantifying how individuals make judgments that then frame decisions.

Judgment reflects an individual’s preferences, or the variable extent to which they approach or avoid events in the world based on the rewarding or aversive effects of these events [ 13 - 15 ]. The definition of preference in psychology differs from that in economics. In psychology, preferences are associated with “wanting” and “liking” and are framed by judgments that precede decisions, which can be quantified through reinforcement reward or incentive reward tasks [ 12 , 16 - 21 ]. In economics, preferences are relations derived from consumer choice data (refer to the axioms of revealed preference [ 22 ]) and reflect choices or decisions based on judgments that place value on behavioral options. Economist Paul Samuelson noted that decisions are “assumed to be correlative to desire or want” [ 23 ]. In this study, we focused on a set of variables that frame judgment, with the presumption that judgments precede choices [ 12 , 20 ]. Variables that frame judgment can be derived from tasks using operant key-pressing tasks that quantify “wanting” [ 24 - 33 ] or simple rating tasks that are analogous to “liking” [ 20 , 34 ]. Both operant keypress and rating tasks measure variables that quantify the average (mean) magnitude ( K ), variance ( σ ), and pattern (ie, Shannon entropy [ H ]) of reward and aversion judgments [ 35 ]. We refer to this methodology and the multiple relationships between these variables and features based on their graphical relationships as relative preference theory (RPT; Figure 1 ) [ 18 , 36 ]. RPT has been shown to produce discrete, recurrent, robust, and scalable relationships between judgment variables [ 37 ] that produce mechanistic models for prediction [ 33 ], and which have demonstrated relationships to brain circuitry [ 24 - 27 , 30 ] and psychiatric illness [ 28 ]. Of the graphs produced for RPT, 2 appear to resemble graphs derived with different variables in economics, namely, prospect theory [ 38 ] and the mean-variance function for portfolio theory described by Markowitz [ 39 ]. Given this graphical resemblance, it is important to note that RPT functions quantifying value are not the same as standard representations of preference in economics. Behavioral economic variables such as loss aversion and risk aversion [ 38 , 40 - 51 ] are not to be interpreted in the same context given that both reflect biases and bounds to human rationality. In psychology, they are grounded in judgments that precede decisions, whereas in economics, they are grounded in consumer decisions themselves. Going forward, we will focus on judgment-based loss aversion, representing the overweighting of negative judgments relative to positive ones, and judgment-based risk aversion, representing the preference for small but certain assessments over larger but less certain ones (ie, assessments that have more variance associated with them) [ 38 , 40 - 51 ]. Herein, loss aversion and risk aversion refer to ratings or judgments that precede decisions.

A number of studies have described how risk aversion and other judgment variables are important for individual vaccine choices and hesitancies [ 52 - 58 ]. Hudson and Montelpare [ 54 ] found that risk aversion may promote vaccine adherence when people perceive contracting a disease as more dangerous or likely. Trueblood et al [ 52 ] noticed that those who were more risk seeking (as measured via a gamble ladder task) were more likely to receive the vaccine even if the vaccine was described as expedited. Wagner et al [ 53 ] described how risk misperceptions (when the actual risk does not align with the perceived risk) may result from a combination of cognitive biases, including loss aversion. A complex theoretical model using historical vaccine attitudes grounded in decision-making has also been proposed to predict COVID-19 vaccination, but this model has not yet been tested [ 59 ]. To our knowledge, no study has assessed how well a model comprising variables that reflect reward and aversion judgments predicts vaccine uptake .

research article using nursing theory

Goal of This Study

Given the many vaccine-related issues that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic (eg, vaccine shortages, hospital overload, and vaccination resistance or hesitancy), it is critical to develop methods that might improve planning around such shortcomings. Because judgment variables are fundamental to vaccine choice, they provide a viable target for predicting vaccine uptake . In addition, the rating methodology used to quantify variables of judgment is independent of methods quantifying vaccine uptake or intent to vaccinate, limiting response biases within the study data.

In this study, we aimed to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake using judgment, demographic, and COVID-19 precaution (ie, behaviors minimizing potential exposure to COVID-19) variables using multiple machine learning algorithms, including logistic regression, random forest, and balanced random forest (BRF). BRF was hypothesized to perform best given its potential benefits with handling class imbalances [ 60 ], balancing both recall and specificity, and producing Gini scores that provide relative variable importance to prediction. In this study, the need for data imbalance techniques was motivated by the importance of the specificity metric, which would reflect the proportion of participants who did not receive full vaccination; without balancing, the model might not achieve similar recall and specificity values. When there is a large difference between recall and specificity, specificity might instead reflect the size of the minority class (those who did not receive full vaccination). In general, random forest approaches have been reported to have benefits over other approaches such as principal component analysis and neural networks, in which the N-dimensional feature space or layers (in the case of neural networks) are complex nonlinear functions, making it difficult to interpret variable importance and relationships to the outcome variable. To provide greater certainty about these assumptions, we performed logistic regression in parallel with random forest and BRF. The 3 machine learning approaches used a small feature set (<20) with interpretable relationships to the predicted variable. Such interpretations may not be achievable in big data approaches that use hundreds to thousands of variables that seemingly add little significance to the prediction models. Interpretation was facilitated by (1) the Gini importance criterion associated with BRF and random forest, which provided a profile of the judgment variables most important for prediction; and (2) mediation and moderation analyses that offered insights into statistical mechanisms among judgment variables, demographic (contextual) variables, and vaccine uptake . Determining whether judgment variables are predictive of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and defining which demographic variables facilitate this prediction presents a number of behavioral targets for vaccine education and messaging—and potentially identifies actionable targets for increasing vaccine uptake .

More broadly, the prediction of vaccine uptake may aid (1) vaccine supply chain and administration logistics by indicating areas that may need more or fewer vaccines, (2) targeted governmental messaging to locations with low predicted uptake, and (3) preparation of areas that may experience high cases of infection that could ultimately impact health care preparedness and infrastructure. The proposed method could also be applied to other mandated or government-recommended vaccines (eg, influenza and human papillomavirus) to facilitate the aforementioned logistics. Locally, vaccine uptake prediction could facilitate local messaging and prepare health care institutions for vaccine rollout and potential hospital overload. Nationally, prediction might inform public health officials and government communication bodies that are responsible for messaging and vaccine rollout with the goal of improving vaccine uptake and limiting infection and hospital overload.


Similar recruitment procedures for a smaller population-based study have been described previously [ 61 - 63 ]. In this study, participants were randomly sampled from the general US population using an email survey database used by Gold Research, Inc. Gold Research administered questionnaires in December 2021 using recruitment formats such as (1) customer databases from large companies that participate in revenue-sharing agreements, (2) social media, and (3) direct mail. Recruited participants followed a double opt-in consent procedure that included primary participation in the study as well as secondary use of anonymized, deidentified data (ie, all identifying information was removed by Gold Research before retrieval by the research group) in secondary analyses (refer to the Ethical Considerations section for more detail). During consent procedures, participants provided demographic information (eg, age, race, and sex) to ensure that the sampled participants adequately represented the US census at the time of the survey (December 2021). Respondents were also presented with repeated test questions to screen out those providing random and illogical responses or showing flatline or speeder behavior. Participants who provided such data were flagged, and their data were removed.

Because other components of the survey required an adequate sample of participants with mental health conditions, Gold Research oversampled 15% (60,000/400,000) of the sample for mental health conditions, and >400,000 respondents were contacted to complete the questionnaire. Gold Research estimated that, of the 400,000 participants, >300,000 (>75%) either did not respond or declined to participate. Of the remaining 25% (100,000/400,000) who clicked on the survey link, >50% (52,000/100,000) did not fully complete the questionnaire. Of the ≥48,000 participants who completed the survey (ie, ≥48,000/400,000, ≥12% of the initial pool of queried persons), those who did not clear data integrity assessments were omitted. Participants who met quality assurance procedures (refer to the following section) were selected, with a limit of 4000 to 4050 total participants.

Eligible participants were required to be aged between 18 and 70 years at the time of the survey, comprehend the English language, and have access to an electronic device (eg, laptop or smartphone).

Ethical Considerations

All participants provided informed consent, which included their primary participation in the study as well as the secondary use of their anonymized, deidentified data (ie, all identifying information removed by Gold Research before retrieval by the research group) in secondary analyses. This study was approved by the Northwestern University institutional review board (approval STU00213665) for the initial project start and later by the University of Cincinnati institutional review board (approval 2023-0164) as some Northwestern University investigators moved to the University of Cincinnati. All study approvals were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants were compensated with US $10 for taking part. Detailed survey instructions have been published previously [ 61 - 63 ].

Quality Assurance and Data Exclusion

Three additional quality assurance measures were used to flag nonadhering participants: (1) participants who indicated that they had ≥10 clinician-diagnosed illnesses (refer to Figure S1 in Multimedia Appendix 1 [ 18 , 33 , 36 , 64 - 68 ] for a list), (2) participants who showed minimal variance in the picture-rating task (ie, all pictures were rated the same or the ratings varied only by 1 point; refer to the Picture-Rating Task section), and (3) inconsistencies between educational level and years of education and participants who completed the questionnaire in <800 seconds.

Data from 4019 participants who passed the initial data integrity assessments were anonymized and then sent to the research team. Data were further excluded if the quantitative feature set derived from the picture-rating task was incomplete or if there were extreme outliers (refer to the RPT Framework section). Using these exclusion criteria, of the 4019 participants, 3476 (86.49%) were cleared for statistical analysis, representing 0.87% (3476/400,000) of the initial recruitment pool. A flowchart of participant exclusion is shown in Figure 2 .

research article using nursing theory


Participants were asked to report their age, sex, ethnicity, annual household income, marital status, employment status, and educational level. Participants were asked to report whether they had received the full vaccination ( yes or no responses). At the time of the survey, participants were likely to have received either 2 doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine or 1 dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine as per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Participants were also asked to respond yes (they routinely followed the precaution) or no (they did not routinely follow the precaution) to 4 COVID-19 precaution behaviors: mask wearing, social distancing, washing or sanitizing hands, and not gathering in large groups (refer to Tables S1 and S2 in Multimedia Appendix 1 for the complete questions and sample sizes, respectively). In addition, participants completed a picture-rating task at 2 points during the survey (refer to the Picture-Rating Task section).

Picture-Rating Task

A picture-rating task was administered to quantify participants’ degree of liking and disliking a validated picture set using pictures calibrated over large samples for their emotional intensity and valence [ 69 , 70 ]. Ratings from this task have been mathematically modeled using RPT to define graphical features of reward and aversion judgments. Each feature quantifies a core aspect of judgment, including risk aversion and loss aversion. Judgment variables have been shown to meet the criteria for lawfulness [ 37 ] that produce mechanistic models for prediction [ 33 ], with published relationships to brain circuitry [ 24 - 27 , 30 ] and psychiatric illness [ 28 ]. A more complete description of these judgment variables and their computation can be found in the RPT Framework section and in Table 1 .

For this task, participants were shown 48 unique color images from the International Affective Picture System [ 69 , 70 ]. A total of 6 picture categories were used: sports, disasters, cute animals, aggressive animals, nature (beach vs mountains), and men and women dressed minimally, with 8 pictures per category (48 pictures in total; Figure 1 A). These images have been used and validated in research on human emotion, attention, and preferences [ 69 , 70 ]. The images were displayed on the participants’ digital devices with a maximum size of 1204 × 768 pixels. Below each picture was a rating scale from −3 ( dislike very much ) to +3 ( like very much ), where 0 indicated indifference ( Figure 1 A). While there was no time limit for selecting a picture rating, participants were asked to rate the images as quickly as possible and use their first impression. Once a rating was selected, the next image was displayed.

RPT Framework

Ratings from the picture-rating task were analyzed using an RPT framework. This framework fits approach and avoidance curves and derives mathematical features from graphical plots ( Figures 1 B-1D). These methods have been described at length in prior work and are briefly described in this section [ 11 , 18 , 33 , 36 ]. More complete descriptions and quality assurance procedures can be found in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

At least 15 judgment variables can be mathematically derived from this framework and are psychologically interpretable; they have been validated using both operant keypress [ 9 , 25 - 27 ] and picture-rating tasks [ 11 , 34 ]. The 15 judgment variables are loss aversion, risk aversion, loss resilience, ante, insurance, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, reward tipping point, aversion tipping point, total reward risk, total aversion risk, reward-aversion trade-off, trade-off range, reward-aversion consistency, and consistency range. Loss aversion, risk aversion, loss resilience, ante, and insurance are derived from the logarithmic or power-law fit of mean picture ratings ( K ) versus entropy of ratings ( H ); this is referred to as the value function ( Figure 1 B). Peak positive risk, peak negative risk, reward tipping point, aversion tipping point, total reward risk, and total aversion risk are derived from the quadratic fit of K versus the SD of picture ratings ( σ ); this is referred to as the limit function ( Figure 1 C). Risk aversion trade-off, trade-off range, risk aversion consistency, and consistency range are derived from the radial fit of the pattern of avoidance judgments ( H − ) versus the pattern of approach judgments ( H + ); this is referred to as the trade-off function ( Figure 1 D). Value (Figure S2A in Multimedia Appendix 1 ), limit (Figure S2B in Multimedia Appendix 1 ), and trade-off (Figure S2C in Multimedia Appendix 1 ) functions were plotted for 500 randomly sampled participants, and nonlinear curve fits were assessed for goodness of fit, yielding R 2 , adjusted R 2 , and the associated F statistic for all participants (Figure S2D in Multimedia Appendix 1 ). Only the logarithmic and quadratic fits are listed in Table S3 in Multimedia Appendix 1 . Each feature describes a quantitative component of a participant’s reward and aversion judgment (refer to Table 1 for abbreviated descriptions and Multimedia Appendix 1 for complete descriptions). Collectively, the 15 RPT features will be henceforth referred to as “judgment variables.” The summary statistics for these variables can be found in Table S3 in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

Statistical and Machine Learning Analyses

Wilcoxon rank sum tests, chi-square tests, and Gini importance plotting were performed in Stata (version 17; StataCorp) [ 72 ]. Machine learning algorithms were run in Python (version 3.9; Python Software Foundation) [ 73 ], where the scikit-learn (version 1.2.2) [ 74 ] and imbalanced-learn (version 0.10.1) [ 75 ] libraries were used. Post hoc mediation and moderation analyses were performed in R (version 4.2.0; R Foundation for Statistical Computing) [ 76 ].

Demographic and Judgment Variable Differences by Vaccination Uptake

Each of the 7 demographic variables (age, income, marital status, employment status, ethnicity, educational level, and sex) was assessed for differences using yes or no responses to receiving the full COVID-19 vaccination (2525/3476, 72.64% yes responses and 951/3476, 27.36% no responses), henceforth referred to as vaccine uptake . Ordinal (income and educational level) and continuous (age) demographic variables were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test ( α =.05). Expected and actual rank sums were reported using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Nominal variables were analyzed using the chi-square test ( α =.05). For significant chi-square results, demographic response percentages were computed to compare the fully vaccinated and not fully vaccinated groups.

Each of the 15 judgment variables was assessed for differences across yes or no responses to vaccine uptake using the Wilcoxon rank sum test ( α =.05). The expected and actual rank sums were reported. Significant results ( α <.05) were corrected for multiple comparisons using the Benjamini-Hochberg correction, and Q values of <0.05 ( Q Hoch ) were reported.

Prediction Analyses

Logistic regression, random forest, and BRF were used to predict vaccine uptake using judgment, demographic, and COVID-19 precaution variables. Gini plots were produced for random forest and BRF to determine the importance of the judgment variables in predicting COVID-19 vaccination. The BRF algorithm balances the samples by randomly downsampling the majority class at each bootstrapped iteration to match the number of samples in the minority class. To provide greater certainty about the results, random forest and logistic regression were performed to compare with BRF results.

Two sets of BRF, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were run: (1) with the 7 demographic variables and 15 judgment variables included as predictors and (2) with the 7 demographic variables, 15 judgment variables, and 4 COVID-19 precaution behaviors included as predictors. COVID-19 precaution behaviors included yes or no responses to wearing a mask, social distancing, washing hands, and avoiding large gatherings (refer to Table S1 in Multimedia Appendix 1 for more details). The sample sizes for yes or no responses to the COVID-19 precaution behavior questions are provided in Table S2 in Multimedia Appendix 1 . For all 3 models, 10-fold cross-validation was repeated 100 times to obtain performance metrics, where data were split for training (90%) and testing (10%) for each of the 10 iterations in cross-validation. The averages of the performance metrics were reported across 100 repeats of 10-fold cross-validation for the test sets. The reported metrics included accuracy, recall, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), precision, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). For BRF, the Python toolbox imbalanced-learn was used to build the classifier, where the training set for each iteration of cross-validation was downsampled but the testing set was unchanged (ie, imbalanced). That is, downsampling only occurred with the bootstrapped samples for training the model, and balancing was not performed on the testing set. The default number of estimators was 100, and the default number of tree splits was 10; the splits were created using the Gini criterion. In separate analyses, estimators were increased to 300, and splits were increased to 15 to test model performance. Using the scikit-learn library, the same procedures used for BRF were followed for random forest without downsampling. Logistic regression without downsampling was implemented with a maximum of 100 iterations and optimization using a limited-memory Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno solver. For logistic regression, model coefficients with respective SEs, z statistics, P values, and 95% CIs were reported.

Relative feature importance based on the Gini criterion (henceforth referred to as Gini importance ) was determined from BRF and random forest using the .feature_importances_ attribute from scikit-learn, and results were reported as the mean decrease in the Gini score and plotted in Stata. To test model performance using only the top predictors, two additional sets of BRF analyses were run: (1) with the top 3 features as predictors and (2) with the top 3 features and 15 judgment variables as predictors.

Post Hoc Mediation and Moderation

Given the importance of both judgment variables and demographic variables (refer to the Results section), we evaluated post hoc how age, income, and educational level (ie, the top 3 predictors) might statistically influence the relationship between the 15 judgment variables and COVID-19 vaccine uptake . To identify statistical mechanisms influencing our prediction results, we used mediation and moderation, which can (1) determine the directionality between variables and (2) assess variable influence in statistical relationships. Mediation is used to determine whether one variable, the mediator, statistically improves the relationship between 2 other variables (independent variables [IVs] and dependent variables [DVs]) [ 77 - 80 ]. When mediating variables improve a relationship, the mediator is said to sit in the statistical pathway between the IVs and DVs [ 77 , 80 , 81 ]. Moderation is used to test whether the interaction between an IV and a moderating variable predicts a DV [ 81 , 82 ].

For mediation, primary and secondary mediations were performed. Primary mediations included each of the 15 judgment behaviors as the IV, each of the 3 demographic variables (age, income, and educational level) as the mediator, and vaccine uptake as the DV. Secondary mediations held the 15 judgment behaviors as the mediator, the 3 demographic variables as the IV, and vaccine uptake as the DV. For moderation, the moderating variable was each of the 3 demographic variables (age, income, and educational level), the IV was each of the 15 judgment behaviors, and the DV was vaccine uptake . The mathematical procedures for mediation and moderation can be found in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

Demographic Assessment

Of the 400,000 persons queried by Gold Research, Inc, 48,000 (12%) completed the survey, and 3476 (0.87%) survived all quality assurance procedures. Participants were predominately female, married, and White individuals; employed full time with some college education; and middle-aged (mean age 51.40, SD 14.92 years; Table 2 ). Of the 3476 participants, 2525 (72.64%) reported receiving a full dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, and 951 (27.36%) reported not receiving a full dose. Participants who indicated full vaccination were predominately female, married, White individuals, and retired; had some college education; and were older on average (mean age 54.19, SD 14.13 years) when compared to the total cohort. Participants who indicated that they did not receive the full vaccine were also predominately female, married, and White individuals. In contrast to those who received the full vaccination, those not fully vaccinated were predominately employed full time, high school graduates, and of average age (mean age 43.98, SD 14.45 years; median age 45, IQR 32-56 years) when compared to the total cohort. Table 2 summarizes the demographic group sample size percentages for the total cohort, those fully vaccinated, and those not fully vaccinated.

When comparing percentages between vaccination groups, a higher percentage of male individuals were fully vaccinated, and a higher percentage of female individuals were not fully vaccinated ( Table 2 ). In addition, a higher percentage of married, White and Asian or Pacific Islander, and retired individuals indicated receiving the full vaccine when compared to the percentages of those who did not receive the vaccine ( Table 2 ). Conversely, a higher percentage of single, African American, and unemployed individuals indicated not receiving the full vaccine ( Table 2 ).

Analysis of Machine Learning Features

Demographic variable differences by vaccine uptake.

Age, income level, and educational level significantly differed between those who did and did not receive the vaccine (Wilcoxon rank sum test α <.05; Table 3 ). Those who indicated full vaccination were, on average, older (median age 59 y), had a higher annual household income (median reported income level US $50,000-$75,000), and had higher levels of education (the median reported educational level was a bachelor’s degree).

Chi-square tests revealed that marital status, employment status, sex, and ethnicity also varied by full vaccine uptake (chi-square α <.05; Table 3 ).

a N/A: not applicable.

Judgment Variable Differences by Vaccine Uptake

In total, 10 of the 15 judgment variables showed nominal rank differences ( α <.05), and 9 showed significant rank differences after correction for multiple comparisons ( Q Hoch <0.05) between those who indicated full vaccination and those who indicated that they did not receive the full vaccination ( Table 4 ). The 10 features included loss aversion, risk aversion, loss resilience, ante, insurance, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, total aversion risk, and trade-off range. Those who indicated full vaccination exhibited lower loss aversion, ante, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, and total aversion risk as well as higher risk aversion, loss resilience, insurance, and trade-off range when compared to the expected rank sum. Those who did not receive the full vaccination exhibited lower risk aversion, loss resilience, insurance, and trade-off range and higher loss aversion, ante, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, and total aversion risk when compared to the expected rank sum.

Machine Learning Results: Predicting Vaccination Uptake

Prediction results.

With the inclusion of demographic and judgment variables, the BRF classifier with the highest accuracy (68.9%) and precision (86.7%) in predicting vaccine uptake resulted when the number of estimators was set to 300 and the number of splits was set to 10 ( Table 5 ). With the addition of 4 COVID-19 precaution behaviors, the BRF classifier with the highest accuracy (70.8%) and precision (87.8%) to predict vaccine uptake occurred when the number of estimators was set to 300 and the number of splits was set to 10. It is notable that specificity was consistently >72%, precision was >86%, and the AUROC was >75% but the NPV was consistently <50%. For random forest and logistic regression, recall and accuracy values were higher than those for BRF, but specificity was always <39%, indicating a lower performance in predicting those who did not receive the vaccine. Precision was also lower, yet the AUROC was consistent with that of the BRF results.

a A total of 15 judgment variables ( Table 4 ), 7 demographic variables ( Table 3 ), and 4 COVID-19 precaution behavior (covid_beh) variables (Table S1 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ) were included in balanced random forest, random forest, and logistic regression models to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake . We used 10-fold cross-validation, where the data were split 90-10 for each of the 10 iterations.

b NPV: negative predictive value.

c AUROC: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

d BRF: balanced random forest.

e N/A: not applicable.

Feature Importance for BRF and Random Forest

Regarding BRF, Gini importance was highest for age, educational level, and income in both BRF classifiers (both without [ Figures 3 A and 3B] and with [ Figures 3 C and 3D] inclusion of the COVID-19 precaution behaviors; refer to the clusters outlined in red in Figures 3 B and 3D). For both BRF classifiers, the top 3 predictors (age, income, and educational level) had a combined effect of 23.4% on the Gini importance for prediction. Following these predictors, the 15 judgment variables had similar importance scores for both BRF classifiers (range 0.037-0.049; refer to the clusters outlined in black in Figures 3 B and 3D). These 15 predictors had a combined effect of 62.9% to 68.7% on the Gini importance for prediction, indicating that judgment variables were collectively the most important for prediction outcomes. The least important features for predicting vaccination status were demographic variables regarding employment status, marital status, ethnicity, sex, and the 4 COVID-19 precaution behaviors. These predictors only contributed 7.3% to the Gini importance for prediction. As a follow-up analysis, BRF analyses were run using the top 3 features from both the Gini importance plots (age, educational level, and income; Table S4 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ) and the top 3 features plus 15 judgment variables (Table S5 in Multimedia Appendix 1 ). The results did not outperform those presented in Table 5 .

For random forest, the Gini importance was highest for age and educational level ( Figure 4 ). These top 2 predictors had a combined effect of 16.5% to 16.8% for the 2 models ( Figures 4 A and 4C). Following these predictors, the 15 judgment variables and the income variable had similar Gini importance, with a combined effect of 69.4% to 75.5% for Gini importance. The least important predictors mirrored those of the BRF results.

research article using nursing theory

Logistic Regression Model Statistics

Both model 1 (demographic and judgment variables) and model 2 (demographic, judgment, and COVID-19 precaution behavior variables) were significant ( P <.001). The model statistics are provided in Tables 6 (model 1) and 7 (model 2). In model 1, age, income, marital status, employment status, sex, educational level, ante, aversion tipping point, reward-aversion consistency, and consistency range were significant ( α <.05). In model 2, age, income, marital status, employment status, sex, educational level, risk aversion, ante, peak negative risk, mask wearing, and not gathering in large groups were significant ( α <.05).

a Overall model: P <.001; pseudo- R 2 =0.149; log-likelihood=−1736.8; log-likelihood null=−2039.7.

a Overall model: P <.001; pseudo- R 2 =0.206; log-likelihood=−1620.0; log-likelihood null=−2039.7.

Because judgment variables and demographic variables (age, income, and educational level) were important predictors, we evaluated post hoc whether demographics statistically mediated or moderated the relationship between each of the 15 judgment variables and binary responses to COVID-19 vaccination.

For primary mediations, age significantly mediated the statistical relationship between 11 judgment variables and vaccine uptake ( α <.05; Table 8 ), income mediated 8 relationships α < <.05; Table 8 ), and educational level mediated 9 relationships ( α <.05; Table 8 ). In total, 7 judgment variables overlapped across the 3 models: loss resilience, ante, insurance, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, risk aversion trade-off, and consistency range. Of these, 5 significantly differed between vaccine uptake (those fully vaccinated and those not): loss resilience, ante, insurance, peak positive risk, and peak negative risk ( Table 3 ). Thus, 2 judgment features did not differ by vaccine uptake but were connected with uptake by significant mediation.

For the secondary mediation analyses, 5 judgment variables mediated the statistical relationship between age and vaccine uptake ; these variables overlapped with the 11 findings of the primary mediation analyses. Furthermore, 4 judgment variables mediated the statistical relationship between income and vaccine uptake ; these variables overlapped with the 8 findings of the primary mediation analyses. Finally, 4 judgment variables mediated the statistical relationship between educational level and vaccine uptake ; these variables overlapped with the 9 findings of the primary mediation analyses. In all secondary analyses, approximately half of the judgment variables were involved in mediation as compared to the doubling of judgment variable numbers observed in the primary mediation analyses. In the secondary mediation analyses, the same 4 judgment variables were found in both primary and secondary mediation results, indicating a mixed mediation framework.

From the moderation analyses, only 2 interactions out of a potential 45 were observed. Age interacted with risk aversion trade-off, and income interacted with loss resilience to statistically predict vaccine uptake ( α <.05; Table 8 ). The 2 moderation results overlapped with the mediation results, indicating mixed mediation-moderation relationships [ 78 , 80 , 81 ].

Principal Findings

Relatively few studies have sought to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake using machine learning approaches [ 8 , 59 ]. Given that a small set of studies has assessed the psychological basis that may underlie vaccine uptake and choices [ 6 , 52 , 53 , 56 , 58 , 59 , 83 ], but none have used computational cognition variables based on reward and aversion judgment to predict vaccine uptake , we sought to assess whether variables quantifying human judgment predicted vaccine uptake . This study found that 7 demographic and 15 judgment variables predicted vaccine uptake with balanced and moderate recall and specificity, moderate accuracy, high AUROC, and high precision using a BRF framework. Other machine learning approaches (random forest and logistic regression) produced higher accuracies but lower specificities, indicating a lower prediction of those who did not receive the vaccine. The BRF also had challenges predicting the negative class, as demonstrated by the relatively low NPV despite having higher specificity than random forest and logistic regression. Feature importance analyses from both BRF and random forest showed that the judgment variables collectively dominated the Gini importance scores. Furthermore, demographic variables acted as statistical mediators in the relationship between judgment variables and vaccine uptake . These mediation findings support the interpretation of the machine learning results that demographic factors, together with judgment variables, predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake .

Interpretation of Judgment Differences Between Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Individuals

Those who were fully vaccinated had lower values for loss aversion, ante, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, and total aversion risk, along with higher values for risk aversion, loss resilience, insurance, and trade-off range (refer to Table 1 for variable descriptions). Lower loss aversion corresponds to less overweighting of bad outcomes relative to good ones [ 84 ] and a potential willingness to obtain a vaccine with uncertain outcomes. A lower ante suggests that individuals are less willing to engage in risky behaviors surrounding potential infection, which is also consistent with the 4 other judgment variables that define relationships between risk and value (peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, and total aversion risk). In participants who indicated full vaccination, lower peak positive risk and peak negative risk were related to individuals having a lower risk that they must overcome to make a choice to either approach or avoid, as per the decision utility equation by Markowitz [ 39 , 71 ]. The lower total reward risk and total aversion risk indicate that the interactions between reward, aversion, and the risks associated with them did not scale significantly; namely, higher reward was not associated with higher risk, and higher negative outcomes were not associated with the uncertainty of them. For these participants, the ability of the vaccine to increase the probability of health and reduce the probability of harm from illness did not have to overcome high obstacles in their vaccine choice. Higher risk aversion in vaccinated participants suggests that these participants viewed contracting COVID-19 as a larger risk and, therefore, were more likely to receive the full dose. These findings are consistent with those of a study by Lepinteur et al [ 58 ], who found that risk-averse individuals were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccination, indicating that the perceived risk of contracting COVID-19 was greater than any risk from the vaccine. Hudson and Montelpare [ 54 ] also found that risk aversion may promote vaccine adherence when people perceive contracting a disease as more dangerous or likely. Higher loss resilience in the vaccinated group was also consistent with the perspective that vaccination would improve their resilience and act as a form of insurance against negative consequences. The higher trade-off range suggests that vaccinated individuals have a broader portfolio of preferences and are more adaptive to bad things occurring, whereas a lower trade-off indicates a restriction in preferences and less adaptability in those who did not receive the vaccine.

Comparison of Prediction Algorithms

When testing these judgment variables (with demographic and COVID-19 precaution behavior variables) in a BRF framework to predict vaccine uptake , we observed a high AUROC of 0.79, where an AUROC of 0.8 is often the threshold for excellent model performance in machine learning [ 85 , 86 ]. The similarity of our reported recall and specificity values with the BRF suggests a balance between predicting true positives and true negatives. The high precision indicates a high certainty in predicting those who were fully vaccinated. The BRF model was successful in identifying those who received the full vaccine (positive cases; indicated by high precision and moderate recall) and those who did not (negative cases; indicated by the specificity). However, NPV was low, indicating a higher rate of false prediction of those who did not receive a full dose counterbalanced by a higher specificity that reflects a higher rate of predicting true negatives. These observations are reflected in the moderate accuracy, which measures the number of correct predictions. A comparison of random forest, logistic regression, and BRF revealed that random forest and logistic regression models produced less balance between recall (high) and specificity (low), which could be interpreted as a bias toward predicting the majority class (ie, those who received the vaccine). That being said, the NPV for BRF was lower than that for random forest and logistic regression, where a low NPV indicates a low probability that those predicted to have not received the vaccine truly did not receive the vaccine when taking both classes into account. Together, the results from all 3 machine learning approaches reveal challenges in predicting the negative class (ie, those who did not receive the vaccine). Overall, the 3 models achieved high accuracy, recall, precision, and AUROC. BRF produced a greater balance between recall and specificity, and the outcome of the worst-performing metric (ie, NPV) was still higher than the specificities for the random forest and logistic regression models.

Feature Importance

Of the 3 prediction algorithms, random forest and BRF had very similar Gini importance results, whereas logistic regression elevated most demographic variables and a minority of judgment variables. This observation could be due to the large variance in each of the judgment variables, which could present challenges for achieving a good fit with logistic regression. In contrast, the demographic and COVID-19 precaution variables had low variance and could be more easily fit in a linear model, hence their significance in the logistic regression results. In comparison to logistic regression, decision trees (eg, BRF and random forest) use variable variance as additional information to optimize classification, potentially leading to a higher importance of judgment variables over most demographic and all COVID-19 precaution variables.

Focusing on the model with balanced recall and specificity (ie, the BRF classifiers [with and without COVID-19 precaution behaviors]), the top predictors were 3 demographic variables (age, income, and educational level), with distributions that varied by vaccine uptake in manners consistent with those of other reports. Namely, older individuals, those identifying as male and White individuals, and those who indicated a higher income and educational level corresponded to those who were or intended to be vaccinated [ 2 , 5 , 87 ]. Despite their saliency, these 3 variables together only contributed 23% to the prediction, corresponding to approximately one-third of the contribution from the 15 judgment variables (63%-69%). The individual Gini importance scores for the 15 judgment variables only ranged from 0.039 to 0.049 but were the dominant set of features behind the moderate accuracy, high precision, and high AUROC. The 18% difference between the accuracy and precision measures suggests that variables other than those used in this study may improve prediction, including contextual variables that may influence vaccine choices. Variables may include political affiliation [ 7 ], longitude and latitude [ 8 ], access to the internet [ 8 ], health literacy [ 54 ], and presence of underlying conditions [ 9 ]. Future work should seek to include these types of variables.

In the second BRF classifier, the 4 COVID-19 precaution behaviors only contributed 6.6% to the prediction. This low contribution could be due to these variables being binary, unlike the other demographic variables, which included a range of categories. In addition, COVID-19 precaution behaviors are specific to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and do not promote interpretation beyond their specific context. The 15 judgment variables represent a contrast to this as they are empirically computed from a set of functions across many picture categories. An individual with higher risk aversion will generally tolerate higher amounts of uncertainty regarding a potential upside or gain as opposed to settling for what they have. This does not depend on what stimulus category they observe or the stimulus-response condition. Instead, it is a general feature of the bounds to their judgment and is part of what behavioral economists such as Kahneman consider as bounds to human rationality [ 84 ].

Mechanistic Relationships Between Judgment and Demographic Variables

The Gini score plots were clear sigmoid-like graphs ( Figure 3 ), with only 3 of the 7 demographic variables ranking above the judgment variables. This observation was consistent in both BRF classifiers (with and without COVID-19 precaution behaviors), raising the possibility of a statistically mechanistic relationship among the top 3 demographic variables, the 15 judgment variables, and vaccine uptake . Indeed, we observed 28 primary mediation effects and 13 secondary mediation effects in contrast to 2 moderation relationships, which also happened to overlap with mediation findings, suggesting mixed mediation-moderation relationships [ 81 , 88 ]. The observation that most judgment variables were significant in mediation relationships but not in moderation relationships argues that prediction depended on the directional relationship between judgment and demographic variables to predict vaccine uptake . Furthermore, there were more significant primary mediations (when judgment variables were the IVs) compared to secondary mediations, suggesting the importance of judgment variables as IVs and demographic variables as mediators. Mathematically, judgment variables (IVs) influenced vaccine uptake (DV), and this relationship was stronger when demographic variables were added to the equation. The 13 secondary mediations all overlapped with the 28 primary mediations, where demographic variables were IVs and judgment variables were mediators, suggesting that demographic variables influenced vaccine uptake (DV) and that this relationship became stronger with the addition of judgment variables. This overlap of primary and secondary mediations for 4 of the judgment variables suggests that both judgment and demographic variables influenced the choice of being vaccinated within a mixed mediation framework because adding either one of them to the mediation model regressions made the relationships stronger [ 49 ]. The lack of moderation results and a considerable number of overlapping primary and secondary mediation results imply that the relationship between judgment variables and vaccine uptake did not depend purely on their interaction with age, income, or educational level (ie, moderation) but, instead, depended on the direct effects of these 3 demographic variables to strengthen the relationship between judgment variables and vaccine uptake . This type of analysis of statistical mechanisms is helpful for understanding contextual effects on our biases and might be important for considering how best to target or message those with higher loss aversion, ante, peak positive risk, peak negative risk, total reward risk, and total aversion risk (ie, in those who were not fully vaccinated).

Model Utility

The developed model is automatable and may have applications in public health. The picture-rating task can be deployed on any smart device or computer, making it accessible to much of the US population or regional populations. The ratings from this task can be automatically processed, and the results can be stored in local or national databases. This method of data collection is novel in that persons cannot bias their responses as the rating task has no perceivable relation to vaccination choices. Government and public health bodies can access these data to determine predicted vaccine uptake rates locally or nationally, which can be used to (1) prepare vaccine rollouts and supply chain demand, (2) prepare health care institutions in areas that may experience low vaccine adherence and potentially higher infection rates, and (3) determine which areas may need more targeted messaging to appeal to specific judgment profiles. For use case 3, messaging about infection risks or precaution behaviors could be framed to address those with lower risk aversion, who, in this study, tended to forgo vaccination. Given that such individualized data would not be available a priori, it would be more plausible to collect data from similarly sized cohorts in geographic regions of concern to obtain regional judgment behavior profiles and, thus, target use cases 1 to 3. Further development of this model with different population samples might also improve our understanding of how certain judgment variables may be targeted with different types of messaging, offering a means to potentially improve vaccine uptake . This model might also be applied to other mandated or recommended vaccines such as those for influenza or human papillomavirus, ultimately improving preparation and messaging efforts. However, future work would be needed to model these varying vaccine choices.

Given the use of demographic variables in the proposed model, specific demographic populations could be assessed or considered for messaging. If particular demographic groups are predicted to have a low vaccine uptake rate, messaging can be targeted to those specific groups. For example, we observed that a higher percentage of female individuals were not fully vaccinated when compared to male individuals. This could be related to concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine affecting fertility or pregnancy. To improve uptake in this population, scientifically backed messaging could be used to confirm the safety of the vaccine in this context. Lower rates of vaccination have been reported in Black communities, which was also observed in this study. Researchers have identified targetable issues related to this observation, which include engagement of Black faith leaders and accessibility of vaccination clinics in Black communities, to name a few [ 89 ].

In summary, this model could be used to predict vaccine uptake at the local and national levels and further assess the demographic and judgment features that may underlie these choices.


This study has a number of limitations that should be considered. First, there are the inherent limitations of using an internet survey—namely, the uncontrolled environment in which participants provide responses. Gold Research, Inc, and the research team applied stringent exclusion criteria, including the evaluation of the judgment graphs given that random responses produce graphs with extremely low R 2 fits (eg, <0.1). This was not the case in our cohort of 3476 participants, but this cannot perfectly exclude random or erroneous responses to other questionnaire components. Second, participants with mental health conditions were oversampled to meet the criteria for other survey components not discussed in this paper. This oversampling could potentially bias the results, and future work should use a general population sample to verify these findings. Third, demographic variability and the resulting confounds are inherent in population surveys, and other demographic factors not collected in this study may be important for prediction (eg, religion and family size). Future work might consider collecting a broader array of demographic factors to investigate and include in predictive modeling. Fourth, we used a limited set of 7 demographic variables and 15 judgment variables; however, a larger set of judgment variables is potentially computable and could be considered for future studies. There is also little information on how post–COVID-19 effects, including socioeconomic effects, affect COVID-19 vaccination choices.


To our knowledge, there has been minimal research on how biases in human judgment might contribute to the psychology underlying individual vaccination preferences and what differentiates individuals who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 from those who were not. This population study of several thousand participants demonstrated that a small set of demographic variables and 15 judgment variables predicted vaccine uptake with moderate to high accuracy and high precision and AUROC, although a large range of specificities was achieved depending on the classification method used. In an age of big data machine learning approaches, this study provides an option for using fewer but more interpretable variables. Age, income, and educational level were independently the most important predictors of vaccine uptake , but judgment variables collectively dominated the importance rankings and contributed almost two-thirds to the prediction of COVID-19 vaccination for the BRF and random forest models. Age, income, and educational level significantly mediated the statistical relationship between judgment variables and vaccine uptake , indicating a statistically mechanistic relationship grounding the prediction results. These findings support the hypothesis that small sets of judgment variables might provide a target for vaccine education and messaging to improve uptake. Such education and messaging might also need to consider contextual variables (ie, age, income, and educational level) that mediate the effect of judgment variables on vaccine uptake . Judgment and demographic variables can be readily collected using any digital device, including smartphones, which are accessible worldwide. Further development and use of this model could (1) improve vaccine uptake , (2) better prepare vaccine rollouts and health care institutions, (3) improve messaging efforts, and (4) have applications for other mandated or government-recommended vaccines.


The authors thank Carol Ross, Angela Braggs-Brown, Tom Talavage, Eric Nauman, and Marc Cahay at the University of Cincinnati (UC) College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, who significantly impacted the transfer of research funding to UC. Funding for this work was provided in part to HCB by the Office of Naval Research (awards N00014-21-1-2216 and N00014-23-1-2396) and to HCB from a Jim Goetz donation to the UC College of Engineering and Applied Sciences. Finally, the authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive input, which substantially improved the manuscript. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and are not necessarily representative of those of their respective institutions.

Data Availability

The data set and corresponding key used in this study are available in Multimedia Appendix 2 .

Conflicts of Interest

A provisional patent has been submitted by the following authors (NLV, SB, HCB, SL, LS, and AKK): “Methods of predicting vaccine uptake,” provisional application # 63/449,460.

Supplementary material.

  • Ezati Rad R, Kahnouji K, Mohseni S, Shahabi N, Noruziyan F, Farshidi H, et al. Predicting the COVID-19 vaccine receive intention based on the theory of reasoned action in the south of Iran. BMC Public Health. Feb 04, 2022;22(1):229. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Mewhirter J, Sagir M, Sanders R. Towards a predictive model of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among American adults. Vaccine. Mar 15, 2022;40(12):1783-1789. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Romate J, Rajkumar E, Greeshma R. Using the integrative model of behavioural prediction to understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy behaviour. Sci Rep. Jun 04, 2022;12(1):9344. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Kalam MA, Davis TPJ, Shano S, Uddin MN, Islam MA, Kanwagi R, et al. Exploring the behavioral determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among an urban population in Bangladesh: implications for behavior change interventions. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0256496. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Koesnoe S, Siddiq TH, Pelupessy DC, Yunihastuti E, Awanis GS, Widhani A, et al. Using integrative behavior model to predict COVID-19 vaccination intention among health care workers in Indonesia: a nationwide survey. Vaccines (Basel). May 04, 2022;10(5):719. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hudson A, Hall PA, Hitchman SC, Meng G, Fong GT. Cognitive predictors of COVID-19 mitigation behaviors in vaccinated and unvaccinated general population members. Vaccine. Jun 19, 2023;41(27):4019-4026. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Dhanani LY, Franz B. A meta-analysis of COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and demographic characteristics in the United States. Public Health. Jun 2022;207:31-38. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Cheong Q, Au-Yeung M, Quon S, Concepcion K, Kong JD. Predictive modeling of vaccination uptake in US counties: a machine learning-based approach. J Med Internet Res. Nov 25, 2021;23(11):e33231. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Bulusu A, Segarra C, Khayat L. Analysis of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people with underlying chronic conditions in 2022: a cross-sectional study. SSM Popul Health. Jun 2023;22:101422. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Painter EM, Ussery EN, Patel A, Hughes MM, Zell ER, Moulia DL, et al. Demographic characteristics of persons vaccinated during the first month of the COVID-19 vaccination program - United States, December 14, 2020-January 14, 2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. Feb 05, 2021;70(5):174-177. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Azcona EA, Kim BW, Vike NL, Bari S, Lalvani S, Stefanopoulos L, et al. Discrete, recurrent, and scalable patterns in human judgement underlie affective picture ratings. arXiv. Preprint posted online March 12, 2022. 2022.:2203.06448. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Breiter HC, Block M, Blood AJ, Calder B, Chamberlain L, Lee N, et al. Redefining neuromarketing as an integrated science of influence. Front Hum Neurosci. Feb 12, 2014;8:1073. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Schneirla TC. An evolutionary and developmental theory of biphasic processes underlying approach and withdrawal. In: Jones MR, editor. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, Nebraska. University of Nebraska Press; 1959;1-42.
  • Schneirla TC. Aspects of stimulation and organization in approach/withdrawal processes underlying vertebrate behavioral development. In: Advances in the Study of Behavior. Cambridge, MA. Academic Press; 1965;1-74.
  • Lewin K. Psycho-sociological problems of a minority group. J Personality. Mar 1935;3(3):175-187. [ CrossRef ]
  • Herrnstein RJ. Secondary reinforcement and rate of primary reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. Jan 1964;7(1):27-36. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Baum WM. On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. J Exp Anal Behav. Jul 1974;22(1):231-242. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Kim BW, Kennedy DN, Lehár J, Lee MJ, Blood AJ, Lee S, et al. Recurrent, robust and scalable patterns underlie human approach and avoidance. PLoS One. May 26, 2010;5(5):e10613. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Berridge KC, Robinson TE. The mind of an addicted brain: neural sensitization of wanting versus liking. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 1995;4(3):71-76. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ]
  • Montague PR. Free will. Curr Biol. Jul 22, 2008;18(14):R584-R585. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Dai X, Brendl CM, Ariely D. Wanting, liking, and preference construction. Emotion. Jun 2010;10(3):324-334. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Mas-Colell A, Whinston MD, Green JR. Microeconomic Theory. Oxford, UK. Oxford University Press; 1995.
  • Marshall A. Principles of Economics. Buffalo, NY. Prometheus Books; 1997.
  • Aharon I, Etcoff N, Ariely D, Chabris CF, O'Connor E, Breiter HC. Beautiful faces have variable reward value: fMRI and behavioral evidence. Neuron. Nov 08, 2001;32(3):537-551. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Viswanathan V, Lee S, Gilman JM, Kim BW, Lee N, Chamberlain L, et al. Age-related striatal BOLD changes without changes in behavioral loss aversion. Front Hum Neurosci. Apr 30, 2015;9:176. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Perlis RH, Holt DJ, Smoller JW, Blood AJ, Lee S, Kim BW, et al. Association of a polymorphism near CREB1 with differential aversion processing in the insula of healthy participants. Arch Gen Psychiatry. Aug 2008;65(8):882-892. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Gasic GP, Smoller JW, Perlis RH, Sun M, Lee S, Kim BW, et al. BDNF, relative preference, and reward circuitry responses to emotional communication. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. Sep 05, 2009;150B(6):762-781. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Makris N, Oscar-Berman M, Jaffin SK, Hodge SM, Kennedy DN, Caviness VS, et al. Decreased volume of the brain reward system in alcoholism. Biol Psychiatry. Aug 01, 2008;64(3):192-202. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Elman I, Ariely D, Mazar N, Aharon I, Lasko NB, Macklin ML, et al. Probing reward function in post-traumatic stress disorder with beautiful facial images. Psychiatry Res. Jun 30, 2005;135(3):179-183. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Strauss MM, Makris N, Aharon I, Vangel MG, Goodman J, Kennedy DN, et al. fMRI of sensitization to angry faces. Neuroimage. Jun 18, 2005;26(2):389-413. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Levy B, Ariely D, Mazar N, Chi W, Lukas S, Elman I. Gender differences in the motivational processing of facial beauty. Learn Motiv. May 2008;39(2):10.1016/j.lmot.2007.09.002. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Yamamoto R, Ariely D, Chi W, Langleben DD, Elman I. Gender differences in the motivational processing of babies are determined by their facial attractiveness. PLoS One. Jun 24, 2009;4(6):e6042. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Viswanathan V, Sheppard JP, Kim BW, Plantz CL, Ying H, Lee MJ, et al. A quantitative relationship between signal detection in attention and approach/avoidance behavior. Front Psychol. Feb 21, 2017;8:122. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Stefanopoulos L, Lalvani S, Kim BW, Vike NL, Bari S, Emanuel A, et al. Predicting depression history from a short reward/aversion task with behavioral economic features. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics 2022. 2022. Presented at: ICBHI 2022; November 24-26, 2022; Concepcion, Chile.
  • Shannon CE, Weaver W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL. The University of Illinois Press; 1949.
  • Livengood SL, Sheppard JP, Kim BW, Malthouse EC, Bourne JE, Barlow AE, et al. Keypress-based musical preference is both individual and lawful. Front Neurosci. May 02, 2017;11:136. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Feynman R, Wilczek F. The Character of Physical Law. New York, NY. Modern Library; 1965.
  • Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica. Mar 1979;47(2):263-292. [ CrossRef ]
  • Markowitz H. Portfolio selection*. J Finance. Apr 30, 2012;7(1):77-91. [ CrossRef ]
  • Nagaya K. Why and under what conditions does loss aversion emerge? Jpn Psychol Res. Oct 15, 2021;65(4):379-398. [ CrossRef ]
  • Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science. Sep 27, 1974;185(4157):1124-1131. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Macoveanu J, Rowe JB, Hornboll B, Elliott R, Paulson OB, Knudsen GM, et al. Serotonin 2A receptors contribute to the regulation of risk-averse decisions. Neuroimage. Dec 2013;83:35-44. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Macoveanu J, Rowe JB, Hornboll B, Elliott R, Paulson OB, Knudsen GM, et al. Playing it safe but losing anyway--serotonergic signaling of negative outcomes in dorsomedial prefrontal cortex in the context of risk-aversion. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. Aug 2013;23(8):919-930. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Schultz W. Dopamine signals for reward value and risk: basic and recent data. Behav Brain Funct. Apr 23, 2010;6:24. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Manssuer L, Ding Q, Zhang Y, Gong H, Liu W, Yang R, et al. Risk and aversion coding in human habenula high gamma activity. Brain. Jun 01, 2023;146(6):2642-2653. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Thrailkill EA, DeSarno M, Higgins ST. Intersections between environmental reward availability, loss aversion, and delay discounting as potential risk factors for cigarette smoking and other substance use. Prev Med. Dec 2022;165(Pt B):107270. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Vrijen C, Hartman CA, Oldehinkel AJ. Reward-related attentional bias at age 16 predicts onset of depression during 9 years of follow-up. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. Mar 2019;58(3):329-338. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hansen A, Turpyn CC, Mauro K, Thompson JC, Chaplin TM. Adolescent brain response to reward is associated with a bias toward immediate reward. Dev Neuropsychol. Aug 2019;44(5):417-428. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Morales S, Miller NV, Troller-Renfree SV, White LK, Degnan KA, Henderson HA, et al. Attention bias to reward predicts behavioral problems and moderates early risk to externalizing and attention problems. Dev Psychopathol. May 2020;32(2):397-409. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Wang S, Krajbich I, Adolphs R, Tsuchiya N. The role of risk aversion in non-conscious decision making. Front Psychol. 2012;3:50. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Chen X, Voets S, Jenkinson N, Galea JM. Dopamine-dependent loss aversion during effort-based decision-making. J Neurosci. Jan 15, 2020;40(3):661-670. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Trueblood JS, Sussman AB, O’Leary D. The role of risk preferences in responses to messaging about COVID-19 vaccine take-up. Soc Psychol Personal Sci. Mar 11, 2021;13(1):311-319. [ CrossRef ]
  • Wagner CE, Prentice JA, Saad-Roy CM, Yang L, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, et al. Economic and behavioral influencers of vaccination and antimicrobial use. Front Public Health. Dec 21, 2020;8:614113. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hudson A, Montelpare WJ. Predictors of vaccine hesitancy: implications for COVID-19 public health messaging. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Jul 29, 2021;18(15):8054. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Horne Z, Powell D, Hummel JE, Holyoak KJ. Countering antivaccination attitudes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Aug 18, 2015;112(33):10321-10324. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Benin AL, Wisler-Scher DJ, Colson E, Shapiro ED, Holmboe ES. Qualitative analysis of mothers' decision-making about vaccines for infants: the importance of trust. Pediatrics. May 2006;117(5):1532-1541. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Noyman-Veksler G, Greenberg D, Grotto I, Shahar G. Parents' malevolent personification of mass vaccination solidifies vaccine hesitancy. J Health Psychol. Oct 2021;26(12):2164-2172. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Lepinteur A, Borga LG, Clark AE, Vögele C, D'Ambrosio C. Risk aversion and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Health Econ. Aug 2023;32(8):1659-1669. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Becchetti L, Candio P, Salustri F. Vaccine uptake and constrained decision making: the case of Covid-19. Soc Sci Med. Nov 2021;289:114410. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Fernández A, García S, Galar M, Prati RC, Krawczyk B, Herrera F. Learning from Imbalanced Data Sets. Cham, Switzerland. Springer International Publishing; 2018.
  • Bari S, Vike NL, Stetsiv K, Woodward S, Lalvani S, Stefanopoulos L, et al. The prevalence of psychotic symptoms, violent ideation, and disruptive behavior in a population with SARS-CoV-2 infection: preliminary study. JMIR Form Res. Aug 16, 2022;6(8):e36444. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Woodward SF, Bari S, Vike N, Lalvani S, Stetsiv K, Kim BW, et al. Anxiety, post-COVID-19 syndrome-related depression, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors in COVID-19 survivors: cross-sectional study. JMIR Form Res. Oct 25, 2022;6(10):e36656. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Vike NL, Bari S, Stetsiv K, Woodward S, Lalvani S, Stefanopoulos L, et al. The Relationship Between a History of High-risk and Destructive Behaviors and COVID-19 Infection: Preliminary Study. JMIR Form Res. 2023;7:e40821. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Lee S, Lee MJ, Kim BW, Gilman JM, Kuster JK, Blood AJ, et al. The commonality of loss aversion across procedures and stimuli. PLoS One. Sep 22, 2015;10(9):e0135216. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Tversky A, Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty. Oct 1992;5(4):297-323. [ CrossRef ]
  • Sheppard JP, Livengood SL, Kim BW, Lee MJ, Blood AJ. Connecting prospect and portfolio theories through relative preference behavior. In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting on Society for NeuroEconomics. 2016. Presented at: SNE '16; August 28-30, 2016;102-103; Berlin, Germany. URL: https://staging.neuroeconomics.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/AbstractBookSNE2016.pdf
  • Zhang R, Brennan TJ, Lo AW. The origin of risk aversion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Dec 16, 2014;111(50):17777-17782. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Iacobucci D. Mediation analysis and categorical variables: the final frontier. J Consum Psychol. Apr 12, 2012;22(4):582-594. [ CrossRef ]
  • Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert MM. Motivated attention: affect, activation and action. In: Lang PJ, Simons RF, Balaban MT, editors. Attention and Orienting: Sensory and Motivational Processes. Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1997;97-136.
  • Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN. International affective picture system (IAPS): affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-8. University of Florida. 2008. URL: https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=755311 [accessed 2021-06-01]
  • Markowitz H. The Utility of Wealth. J Political Econ. Apr 1952;60(2):151-158. [ CrossRef ]
  • StataCorp. Stata statistical software: release 17. StataCorp LLC. College Station, TX. StataCorp LLC; 2021. URL: https://www.stata.com/company/ [accessed 2024-02-23]
  • Van Rossum G, Drake FL. Python 3 Reference Manual. Scotts Valley, CA. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; 2009.
  • Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res. 2011;12(85):2825-2830. [ FREE Full text ]
  • Lemaître G, Nogueira F, Aridas CK. Imbalanced-learn: a python toolbox to tackle the curse of imbalanced datasets in machine learning. J Mach Learn Res. 2017;18(17):1-5. [ FREE Full text ]
  • R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2019. URL: https://www.r-project.org/ [accessed 2024-02-23]
  • David A. Kenny's homepage. David A. Kenny. URL: http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm [accessed 2024-02-22]
  • MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS. Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:593-614. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • MacKinnon DP, Cheong J, Pirlott AG. Statistical mediation analysis. In: Cooper H, Camic PM, Long DL, Panter AT, Rindskopf D, Sher KJ, editors. APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology. Washington, DC. American Psychological Association; 2012;313-331.
  • Mackinnon DP. Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. New York, NY. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008.
  • Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173-1182. [ CrossRef ]
  • Hayes AF. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York, NY. Guilford Press; 2018.
  • Charpentier CJ, Aylward J, Roiser JP, Robinson OJ. Enhanced risk aversion, but not loss aversion, in unmedicated pathological anxiety. Biol Psychiatry. Jun 15, 2017;81(12):1014-1022. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Kahneman D, Tversky A. On the interpretation of intuitive probability: a reply to Jonathan Cohen. Cognition. Jan 1979;7(4):409-411. [ CrossRef ]
  • Mandrekar JN. Receiver operating characteristic curve in diagnostic test assessment. J Thorac Oncol. Sep 2010;5(9):1315-1316. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Watt J, Borhani R, Katsaggelos AK. Machine Learning Refined: Foundations, Algorithms, and Applications. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press; 2016.
  • Viswanath K, Bekalu M, Dhawan D, Pinnamaneni R, Lang J, McLoud R. Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. BMC Public Health. Apr 28, 2021;21(1):818. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Judd CM, Kenny DA, McClelland GH. Estimating and testing mediation and moderation in within-subject designs. Psychol Methods. Jun 2001;6(2):115-134. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Abdul-Mutakabbir JC, Casey S, Jews V, King A, Simmons K, Hogue MD, et al. A three-tiered approach to address barriers to COVID-19 vaccine delivery in the Black community. Lancet Glob Health. Jun 2021;9(6):e749-e750. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]


Edited by A Mavragani; submitted 11.04.23; peer-reviewed by ME Visier Alfonso, L Lapp; comments to author 18.05.23; revised version received 08.08.23; accepted 10.01.24; published 18.03.24.

©Nicole L Vike, Sumra Bari, Leandros Stefanopoulos, Shamal Lalvani, Byoung Woo Kim, Nicos Maglaveras, Martin Block, Hans C Breiter, Aggelos K Katsaggelos. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 18.03.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://publichealth.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.


  1. Informative Essay on Nursing Theory

    research article using nursing theory

  2. (PDF) Understanding the research process in nursing

    research article using nursing theory

  3. CATCH-IT Evaluation: Promoting Adolescent Health

    research article using nursing theory

  4. Theory-guided Research: What, Why, and How?

    research article using nursing theory

  5. Theories and Frameworks for Professional Nursing Practice

    research article using nursing theory

  6. 🎉 Example of theoretical framework in nursing research. Theoretical

    research article using nursing theory


  1. "Nursing Research & It's Implications"


  3. Second Semester Post RN (BSN)

  4. Module #1: Basic principles of clinical research (Lecture 4)

  5. Medical Research

  6. Nursing RESEARCH: Common Board Exam Questions


  1. Usefulness of nursing theory-guided practice: an integrative review

    Abstract. Background: Nursing theory-guided practice helps improve the quality of nursing care because it allows nurses to articulate what they do for patients and why they do it. However, the usefulness of nursing theory-guided practice has been questioned and more emphasis has been placed on evidence-based nursing and traditional practice.

  2. Expanding the theoretical understanding in Advanced Practice Nursing

    Nursing is considered a young science, which indicates that nursing theories are still in the process of being developed. 6 The present nursing theories were selected to represent useful approaches to expand this discussion. We believe that placing the present nursing situation in the context of nursing practice and research findings is a ...

  3. Theory-Based Advanced Nursing Practice: A Practice Update on the

    Many researchers have commended the self-care deficit nursing theory (SCDNT) developed by Orem as a means of improving patients' health outcomes through nurses' contributions. However, experimental research has investigated specific aspects of SCDNT, such as self-care agency and self-care requisites, rather than how the construct is practiced ...

  4. Nursing research: A marriage of theoretical influences

    Eighteen of the PhD theses were based on theoretical approaches from philosophy, ethics, pedagogy, medicine or biology as a primary perspective. Nursing theories, in their conventional definition, have a limited presence in the theses examined. Keywords: doctoral students, nurses, nursing, PhD, research, The University of Edinburgh.

  5. Theory-Based Advanced Nursing Practice: A Practice Update on the

    Many researchers have recommended the self-care deficit nursing theory (SCDNT) developed by Orem (1995) to improve patients' health outcomes in terms of the nurses' contributions. Experimental studies on this theory include assessing the value of SCDNT in reducing fatigue in patients with multiple sclerosis (Afrasiabifar et al., 2016) and an evaluation of SCDNT-based care in improving the ...

  6. Lessons learned through nursing theory : Nursing2023

    A nurse educator looks back at the influence of nursing theorists on today's evidence-based practice. Figure. TODAY'S CLINICAL setting is filled with discussion and implementation of evidence-based practice, but this wasn't always the case. 1 Theorists have elevated the science of nursing to its modern prominence with decades of research.

  7. Use of Nursing Theory to Guide Doctoral Research: An Exploratory Study

    This descriptive, exploratory study involved a review of 747 doctoral papers to determine whether nursing students are using nursing or non-nursing theory to guide their research. The findings revealed that although 86.9% of doctoral students used theory, just 31.7% used nursing-specific theory to guide their dissertation study or capstone project.

  8. Key Issues in Nursing Theory: Developments, Challenges, and ...

    Detours and dead ends for theory development involved metatheory debates and specific events. Challenges identified relate to rapid changes in society, healthcare, and science. A pathway for the future is presented in a figure with its description of the structure of nursing knowledge. Discussion: The potential of this structure for developing ...

  9. Nursing theory-guided research

    Theory-guided research has a long tradition in nursing that spans at least 50 years. Yet the use of nursing theory with qualitative research approaches continues to raise questions. Grounded theory is selected by nurses as a research methodology to address research questions that are aimed at unders …

  10. Theory Use and Usefulness in Scientific Advancement : Nursing Research

    Greater rigor and precision in theory development and testing is much needed. Science advances because of and sometimes in spite of our efforts. Theory should help that advancement, providing explanations of phenomena and their relationships. Using theory in research allows us to refine the definitions and scope of the discipline of nursing.

  11. How could nurse researchers apply theory to generate knowledge more

    Conclusions: Nurse researchers can review and refine ways in which they apply theory in guiding research and writing publications. Scholars can appreciate how one theory can guide researchers in building knowledge about a given condition such as preventive behaviors. Clinicians and researchers can collaborate to apply and examine the usefulness ...

  12. Is There Still Value in Teaching Nursing Theory?

    Although the directing framework does not explicitly state that curricula should be nursing theory-based, it explicitly indicates that the application of theory and research-based knowledge be derived "… from nursing, the arts, humanities, and other sciences" (AACN, 2021, p. 27).

  13. (PDF) Nursing theories: Foundation for nursing profession

    Abstract. clinical practice in order to achieve high quality of care. Nursing theories provide a medium to rationalize the care provided by nurses. Moreover, it provides an identity to nurses that ...

  14. Using a theoretical framework in a research study

    Often the most difficult part of a research study is preparing the proposal based around a theoretical or philosophical framework. Graduate students '…express confusion, a lack of knowledge, and frustration with the challenge of choosing a theoretical framework and understanding how to apply it'.1 However, the importance in understanding and applying a theoretical framework in research ...

  15. Full article: Mental Health Risk Assessments of Patients, by Nurses

    Introduction. Mental health risk-assessments are a core aspect of nursing in mental health settings, and of invaluable assistance in the identification and mitigation (or prevention) of potential harm by a patient to self or others (Hautamäki, Citation 2018; Higgins et al., Citation 2016).This key decision-making process usually takes place in response to perceived indicators of risk, a ...

  16. New Knowledge for the Profession: Case for Using Nursing Theory

    First, the authors of this column reiterate the need for using nursing theory as a foundation for nursing research and practice. A study underpinned by Johnson's behavioral model is presented as an excellent example of the use of nursing theory to guide research in the care of people with heart failure.

  17. Neuman Systems Model With Nurse-Led Interprofessional Collaborative

    The NSM can be used as a framework for case studies of various clients as well as build upon previous systems' theory and research relating to nursing prevention strategies (Memmott, Marett, Bott, & Duke, 2000; Ong, 2017). This theoretical framework can be used to guide both experimental and quasi-experimental studies and was designed with a ...

  18. PDF Research and Theory for Nursing Practice

    improving nursing practice. Nursing practice incorporates roles related to patient care, nursing education, and nursing administration. The articles strive to discuss knowledge development in its broadest sense, reflect research using a variety of methodological approaches, and combine several methods and strategies in a single study.

  19. What is Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing?

    Research findings support a significant percentage of nursing practices, and ongoing studies anticipate this will continue to increase. Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing Examples. There are various examples of evidence-based practice in nursing, such as: Use of oxygen to help with hypoxia and organ failure in patients with COPD ; Management of ...

  20. Who uses nursing theory? A univariate descriptive analysis of five

    Results: Of 2857 articles published in the seven journals from 2002 to, and including, 2006, 2184 (76%) were research articles. Of the 837 (38%) authors who used theories, 460 (55%) used nursing theories, 377 (45%) used other theories: 776 (93%) of those who used theory integrated it into their studies, including qualitative studies, while 51 ...

  21. What Is Nursing Theory and Why Is It Important for Nurses?

    Nursing theories provide a foundation for clinical decision-making. These theoretical models in nursing shape nursing research and create conceptual blueprints, ultimately determining the how and why that drive nurse-patient interactions. Nurse researchers and scholars naturally develop these theories with the input and influence of other ...

  22. Unfinished nursing care in healthcare settings during the COVID-19

    Unfinished nursing care (UNC), which is becoming increasingly more of a concern in worldwide healthcare settings, involves the skipped, delayed, or incomplete delivery of nursing interventions needed for the patient and/or the patient's family [1, 2].The prevalence of UNC, which ranges from 55 to 98% globally [], is considered as an accurate indicator of both patient safety and nursing care ...

  23. Nursing process from theory to practice: Evidence from the

    How can nursing theory be evaluated in a rigorous and meaningful way? This article presents a comprehensive framework for theory evaluation in nursing, based on the criteria of clarity, consistency, adequacy, logical development, level of theory development, and empirical and pragmatic adequacy. The article also discusses the implications of theory evaluation for nursing practice, education ...

  24. Nursing Theory and Frameworks

    Nursing Research; Evidence-Based Practice; History of Nursing Resources; Nursing Theory and Frameworks; School of Nursing Resources. ... The University of Toledo's Guide to Nursing Theory - includes tips on how to search specific databases for theory and theorist-related information.

  25. Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific

    a, Scientists using AI tools for their research may experience an illusion of explanatory depth.In this example, a scientist uses an AI Quant to model a phenomenon (X) and believes they understand ...

  26. Journal of Medical Internet Research

    Background: In recent years, Korean society has increasingly recognized the importance of nurses in the context of population aging and infectious disease control. However, nurses still face difficulties with regard to policy activities that are aimed at improving the nursing workforce structure and working environment. Media coverage plays an important role in public awareness of a particular ...

  27. A Book Review of Nursing Theories and Nursing Practice (5th ed

    Marlaine C. Smith (2020), editor, has compiled a comprehensive overview of the diverse nursing theories that guide nursing practice in today's shifting healthcare landscape.The overview is much deeper and broader than a "theory at a glance," particularly when accompanied by online references and a labyrinth of web resources.

  28. Creating a Culture of Safety in Nursing

    Additional procedures, like double-checking drug orders and using barcode scanning systems, further reinforce a safety culture in healthcare. Sharps Injury Prevention. The safe use and disposal of sharps is a critical health and safety issue, and blood-borne pathogens present a significant level of risk in the health care work environment. It ...

  29. The Evolution of Nursing Research

    Abstract. THE RESEARCH CULTURE in nursing has evolved in the last 150 years, beginning with Nightingale's work in the mid-1850s and culminating in the creation of the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) at the National Institues of Health (NIH). This article highlights nursing's efforts to facilitate the growth of the research ...

  30. Predicting COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Using a Small and Interpretable

    Background: Despite COVID-19 vaccine mandates, many chose to forgo vaccination, raising questions about the psychology underlying how judgment affects these choices. Research shows that reward and aversion judgments are important for vaccination choice; however, no studies have integrated such cognitive science with machine learning to predict COVID-19 vaccine uptake.