Ethical challenges in sensitive research: a reflective narrative on managing the clinician-researcher dual role

Conducting sensitive research in healthcare settings often presents complex ethical challenges, particularly when clinicians assume a dual role as researchers. This dual role, while providing valuable insight, can lead to ethical dilemmas when professional responsibilities intersect with research obligations, especially in resource-limited and culturally sensitive environments. This reflective narrative explores these ethical tensions through the lens of a qualitative study involving men living with advanced prostate cancer and their family caregivers. The study employed a qualitative design, drawing on individual and dyadic interviews, as well as focus group discussions with healthcare professionals. A reflective narrative approach was chosen as the method to critically engage with the researcher’s personal experiences, ethical dilemmas, and the emotional complexities of conducting research in this context. The approach was justified as it provides a means of exploring both the data and the reflective, situated nature of the clinician–researcher role, which is essential for understanding the broader implications of conducting sensitive research. The analysis revealed several key ethical challenges, including emotional labour, professional role conflicts, and the management of therapeutic boundaries. The clinician–researcher dual role significantly shaped participant consent, data collection, and interpretation of findings. It highlighted the vulnerability of both participants and researchers, especially in emotionally charged, culturally sensitive contexts. Ethical tensions often arose between maintaining professional objectivity and addressing the immediate care needs of participants, underscoring the importance of reflexivity in navigating these complexities. This reflection calls for enhanced ethical preparation and emotional resilience among nurse researchers, particularly those working with vulnerable populations in sensitive research areas like palliative care. The study emphasises the need for clear boundary protocols, structured reflexive journaling, and regular peer debriefing to help clinician–researchers navigate their dual roles while maintaining ethical integrity. The findings contribute to the discourse on ethical praxis in qualitative health research, offering practical strategies for managing the inherent challenges of conducting research in ethically complex environments. This reflective piece is crucial for understanding the ethical and emotional challenges faced by clinician–researchers, particularly in sensitive research with vulnerable populations in resource-limited settings. It adds valuable insights to the literature, highlighting global south-specific considerations and offering practical strategies for navigating the clinician-researcher dual role in palliative care, with implications for nursing practice, education, and policy development.