Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The project exposes a discrepancy between the manner in which the nursing staff perceive use of restraints in an idealistic situation and in a realistic situation and the greater tendency to use restraints in the realistic situation than in the idealistic situation. The main contribution of the project is in revealing the conflict between the personal beliefs of the nursing staff and the nurses' perceptions of their institutional obligations. The project uncovered a discrepancy among the beliefs, the personal and professional values of the nursing staff, and their perception regarding the actual use of restraints in the daily work routine.

Key findings

Why it matters

This project exposed a discrepancy between how nursing staff perceived use of restraints in an idealistic situation versus a realistic situation, with a greater tendency to use restraints in the realistic situation. It revealed a conflict between the personal beliefs of the nursing staff and their perceptions of institutional obligations.

Study details

How this study scored 26/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 1 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 1 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 26 of 100.26 of 100 points earned74 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JONA'S healthcare law, ethics and regulation)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 JONA s Healthcare Law Ethics and Regulation: journal h-index 23 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.0 citations a year over 25 year(s) since 2003
Impact for its field and year 1 / 6 Cited 0.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 1 / 4 Last-listed author Rebecca Bergman: h-index 13 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Tel Aviv University: institution h-index 1,018 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 14660939)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 26 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Weiner, C., Tabak, N., & Bergman, R. (2003). Use of restraints on dementia patients: an ethical dilemma of a nursing staff in Israel. JONA'S healthcare law, ethics and regulation. https://doi.org/10.1097/00128488-200312000-00007

Vancouver

Weiner C, Tabak N, Bergman R. Use of restraints on dementia patients: an ethical dilemma of a nursing staff in Israel. JONA'S healthcare law, ethics and regulation. 2003. doi:10.1097/00128488-200312000-00007. PMID: 14660939.

BibTeX

@article{weiner2003-14660939,
  author  = {Weiner, Chava and Tabak, Nili and Bergman, Rebecca},
  title   = {{Use of restraints on dementia patients: an ethical dilemma of a nursing staff in Israel}},
  journal = {JONA'S healthcare law, ethics and regulation},
  year    = {2003},
  doi     = {10.1097/00128488-200312000-00007},
  pmid    = {14660939},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1097/00128488-200312000-00007}
}

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also tagged “care”

996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →