ArticlePloS one2025
Developing a national code of ethics for pharmacists in Kuwait: Insights from a survey and a modified Delphi study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmacists play a crucial role in healthcare and are expected to uphold high ethical standards. Establishing a code of ethics for pharmacists is essential as it supports improved patient outcomes and increases trust in the healthcare system. Regulatory organizations worldwide have recognized the significance of such codes in guiding professional behaviour and ensuring quality care. However, a national code of ethics for pharmacists in Kuwait has not yet been published. The aim of this study was to propose a national code of ethics for pharmacists in Kuwait, using insights from a survey of practicing pharmacists and a modified Delphi study involving expert consensus.
methodsA mixed methodology was employed comprising a survey of practicing pharmacists to gather their views on the clarity and acceptance of the 14 FIP standards and a modified Delphi study involving a group of experts to finalize and formulate the national code of ethics for pharmacists in Kuwait. For the survey, all registered pharmacists practicing in Kuwait were invited to participate through the Kuwait Pharmaceutical Association. Data collection occurred between February and May 2019 via an electronic questionnaire. The Delphi study participants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling, with data collection taking place between March and June 2023. The Delphi study required a 90% consensus threshold for standard inclusion.
resultsA total of 304 pharmacists (7.6% response rate) participated in the survey. The median age was 32 years, with a gender distribution of 56.6% female. The majority (85%) reported Arabic as their first language, and 75% held a BPharm degree. Most participants found the standards clear and acceptable, with clarity percentages generally above 88% and acceptance percentages similarly high. Standards 3 (patient autonomy) and 11 (competency of support staff) had slightly lower ratings, indicating potential areas for improvement. Comments highlighted issues such as patient knowledge and the clarity of support staff roles. In the Delphi study, 30 experts participated in the first round, with standards needing a 90% consensus for inclusion. Seven standards reached consensus in the first round, four in the second, and four in the third. Standard 11 failed to achieve consensus and was removed. The iterative process ensured thorough evaluation and refinement of each standard based on expert feedback.
conclusionThis study proposed a national code of ethics for pharmacists in Kuwait based on a comprehensive mixed-methods approach. The survey indicated high clarity and acceptance of most FIP standards among pharmacists, though areas for improvement were identified. The Delphi study achieved consensus on 13 out of 14 standards. This proposal provides a foundation for regulators to establish a formal code of ethics, aiming to enhance professionalism and patient trust in the healthcare system.
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.