ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Fostering moral reflectivity in community pharmacists through moral case deliberation using the dilemma method.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The second victim experience and support tool: a cross-cultural adaptation, validation and psychometric evaluation of the Serbian version for pharmacy professionals (SR-SVEST-R).International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMoral case deliberation has been successfully implemented in multidisciplinary groups of secondary care professionals to support ethical decision making. It has not yet been reported for community pharmacists.
aimThis study investigated whether moral case deliberation fosters moral reflectivity in community pharmacists.
methodTwo moral case deliberations with 14 community pharmacists were guided by two facilitators. One session was described and illustrated with participants' quotes, detailing each reflection step of the method. An adapted version of the Maastricht evaluation questionnaire was used to understand the effects of the moral case deliberation on participants' moral reflectivity skills both quantitatively and qualitatively.
resultsIn a 2-h session, pharmacists reflected on a moral dilemma concerning double anticoagulant therapy of one presenter pharmacist. Participants discussed the pros and cons of two potential actions: dispensing the medication as prescribed without contacting the patient or contacting the patient first. Deliberation highlighted the importance of understanding the patient's perspective, leading the presenter and two others to shift towards the latter action. The evaluation questionnaire revealed that all 14 participants felt supported by the deliberation and the facilitator in recognising the dilemma's moral dimension and understanding their own and others' values behind arguments and how these influenced different perspectives. They all felt encouraged to critically reflect, to ask open questions and to delay judgements. The method helped all to morally justify their final decision, with six participants arriving at a decision different from their initial perspective towards the dilemma's resolution.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that moral case deliberation enables pharmacists to critically examine their reasoning and reach morally sound resolutions, supporting pharmacists' professionalism and ethical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.