ReviewThe Journal of medicine and philosophy2025
A Critical Interpretive Literature Review of Phronesis in Medicine.
Review in The Journal of medicine and philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical wisdom in medicine: defending a multidimensional, integrated view of an indispensable virtue.Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2026Article
- It is Prudent to Declare all Possible Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical Publishing: An Ambiguous Example From COVID-19.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Uncertainty tolerance in healthcare: towards a normative conception.Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2026Article
- Including gender data in electronic health records to improve the care provided to transgender and non-binary patients in Quebec: A queer bioethics analysis.International journal of transgender health · 2026Article
- What Does Moral Agency Mean for Nurses in the Era of Artificial Intelligence?The Hastings Center reportArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article presents the results of a rigorous critical interpretive review that maps the current literature on phronesis in medicine. The literature in this area involves varied disciplines, centuries, and conceptions and is extensive, but through a focused review, this study seeks to clarify definitions and key distinctions. It thereby aims to elucidate a depth of meaning and understanding regarding phronesis in medicine to inform future work on the topic. Specifically, 12 themes are inductively identified and analyzed from the literature, and organized into three chronological categories of past, present, and future. A narrative summation of the literature to date is then offered, assessing the varied conceptual applications of phronesis to medical practice, the emerging literature on its applicability to organizations, prospects for empirical work on the concept, and its application in medical education.
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.