ArticleNursing in critical care2026
The Unseen Wounds of Intensive Care: A Mixed Methods Study of Nurses' Exposure to Violence.
Article in Nursing in critical care, 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
Abstract
backgroundIntensive care units constitute one of the most stressful working environments for healthcare workers, and workplace violence represents a significant occupational risk in these units. Violence is not limited to physical harm alone; it negatively impacts nurses' psychosocial well-being, performance and the quality of care.
aimThis study aims to examine experiences of workplace violence conceptualised as 'invisible wounds' in intensive care units using a mixed methods approach with a sample of intensive care nurses. STUDY
designThis study used a mixed methods design, combining a cross-sectional survey with qualitative content analysis. The research was designed as a mixed methods study and was conducted between 15 February and 5 April 2026. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 nurses; in the quantitative phase, the Demographic Characteristics Form and The Multidimensional Presenteeism in Nurses Scale were administered to 130 nurses. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS 27 and MAXQDA 2022. RESULTS/
findingsOf the total sample (N = 130), 64.6% of nurses reported exposure to workplace violence at least once in their professional practice (n = 84/130); the most common type of violence was verbal violence (91.7%). The rate of physical violence was 32.1%, and the most significant source of violence was patients' relatives (67.9%). Only 46.4% of nurses who had been exposed to violence reported the incident. The mean scores on the 'Experience of Presenteeism at Work' scale were 19.13 ± 8.57 for the experience dimension, 43.64 ± 11.44 for the reasons dimension, and 69.52 ± 18.86 for the consequences dimension. Qualitative findings revealed that the experience of violence was described using the metaphor of an 'invisible wound', that violence became normalised over time, and that nurses predominantly turned to individual coping strategies.
conclusionsWorkplace violence among intensive care nurses is a widespread, multidimensional and largely normalised problem. Low reporting rates and the normalisation of violence create a vicious cycle in which opportunities for learning and improvement are lost. To break this cycle, it is necessary to strengthen a culture of reporting, develop institutional support mechanisms and implement holistic strategies that prioritise staff safety. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Identifying the prevalence, under-reporting and normalisation of workplace violence in intensive care units enables targeted interventions that reduce exposure to violence, improve nurses' well-being and performance and promote a safety culture through effective reporting systems.
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.