ArticleBMC nursing2026
Nursing faculty's experiences of publication stress and research integrity: a phenomenological study in Jordan universities.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaculty members are overwhelmed by tremendously huge academic responsibilities. This might lead to both professional and personal burdens. These burdens might in turn influence research integrity and may potentially prompt unethical practices. This study aims to explore the lived experiences of pre-tenured and tenured nursing faculty members in Jordanian universities, focusing on how they perceive and navigate the challenges of publication and research integrity.
methodsA descriptive phenomenological design guided by Giorgi’s method. In-depth semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with purposively selected nursing faculty members at two large Jordanian universities: one public and one private. Thematic analysis was used to capture the essence of participants’ experiences. A purposive sample of nine pre-tenured and tenured, master’s and PhD nursing faculty members in Jordanian universities, public and private.
resultsThe analysis uncovered five themes reflecting the faculty’s experiences in research publication and integrity. This included: (1) Institutional Paradoxes and Lack of Support (lack of financial funding for publishing, absence of workload reduction, and constrained research structure); (2) Crushing Teaching and Administrative Burden (administrative and clinical responsibilities, administrative and clinical responsibilities, and heavy teaching schedules with large class sizes); (3) Quantity over Quality in Research Evaluation (point system and author order, and devaluing candid contribution);4) Unethical Research Practices (data fabrication and manipulation, exploitation of graduate students, and predatory practices of publication); and 5) Emotional and Existential Price (frustration and disappointment, fatigue and burnout).
conclusionThis study highlights the pressures and challenges nursing faculty members face regarding publication and research integrity. Universities should move beyond numeracy-based promotion systems and develop strategies to foster a healthy and ethical research environment that contributes to raising the quality of scientific production. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.