↓ Skip to main content

The professional consequences of whistleblowing by nurses

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Professional Nursing, November 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The professional consequences of whistleblowing by nurses
Published in
Journal of Professional Nursing, November 2000
DOI 10.1053/jpnu.2000.18178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally McDonald, Kathy Ahern

Abstract

When nurses encounter misconduct in the workplace, their ethical codes of conduct bind them to the role of patient advocacy and compel them to safeguard the patient from harm. However, reporting misconduct can be personally and professionally risky. The aim of the research was to examine the professional consequences of whistleblowing and nonwhistleblowing in nursing. A descriptive survey design was used to examine the professional effect of reporting misconduct (whistleblowing) and not reporting misconduct (nonwhistleblowing). Ninety-five respondents were included in the study; 70 were self-identified as whistleblowers and 25 were self-identified as nonwhistleblowers. Results indicated that there were severe professional reprisals if the nurse reported misconduct, but there were few professional consequences if the nurse remained silent. Official reprisals included demotion (4%), reprimand (11%), and referral to a psychiatrist (9%). Whistleblowers also reported that they received professional reprisals in the form of threats (16%), rejection by peers (14%), pressure to resign (7%), and being treated as a traitor (14%). Ten per cent reported that they felt their career had been halted. These findings suggest that when nurses identify and report misconduct in the workplace, they may experience serious professional consequences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 27 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 13 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Psychology 9 11%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 27 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,234,522
of 25,500,206 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Professional Nursing
#51
of 597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,627
of 41,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Professional Nursing
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,500,206 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 41,145 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them