Martha Rogers' science of unitary human beings in relation to workers health and well-being: A scoping review.
Åsa Hedlund
PMID 37182858WHAT IT FOUND
Only five studies applied this nursing theory to worker well-being, all involving nurses.
The theory was rarely used adequately. Findings linked stress and job satisfaction to social support and environment, but the evidence base is too sparse to guide practice.
Key findings
01The review identified only five studies, all conducted in the United States and involving nurses, with minimal use of the theory in recent years.
02Most studies used the theory minimally or insufficiently, meaning it did not shape the hypotheses or was not explicitly tested.
03Work environment aspects were dominated by human interactions (colleagues, patients), with technical and organizational aspects rarely addressed.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only five studies were included, all involving nurses, so the findings cannot be generalized to other professions or settings. All studies originated from the United States, limiting geographic diversity. The methodological quality of the included studies varied, with several having flaws such as unclear measurement validity or lack of confounder identification. The review process (selection, analysis, quality assessment) was conducted by a single author, increasing the risk of bias. Only two databases were searched, and non-English articles were excluded, which may have missed relevant studies. Middle-range theories derived from Rogers' work were excluded, potentially narrowing the scope of the review.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret this review as evidence that Martha Rogers' theory improves worker well-being. The review found very few studies, most used the theory poorly, and the evidence is too limited to support any clinical application or recommendation.