Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40839177›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2025

Moral reasoning skills: what they are and how they can be furthered in health professions education.

Annett Wienmeister

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Annett WienmeisterInstitute for the History of Medicine and Ethics in Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. annett.wienmeister@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8935-9711

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is widely agreed that moral reasoning skills are an important aspect of ethical competency in the health professions and that students should acquire those skills. Nevertheless, ethics instructors might find it difficult to choose specific exercises and methods to further those skills because there is no shared understanding of what the term "moral reasoning skills" implies. As a result, there is a didactical gap between learning objective and methodology. In this paper, I demonstrate that and why the term "moral reasoning" is an underdetermined concept in the didactics literature of the health professions. With reference to the discipline of informal logic I will introduce a definition of the term and quality criteria for good moral reasoning that facilitate didactical interventions. I introduce three basic suggestions that instructors can follow if they want to further moral reasoning skills in students. I show how the three suggestions translate into specific learning objectives, which help instructors design exercises and choose appropriate methods for teaching and learning. Towards the end, I will discuss the critical factor of time in educational settings.

Indexed as

Health OccupationsMoralsThinkingHumansLearningArgumentEducationEthicsInformal logicMoral reasoning

Identifiers

PMID40839177
PMCPMC12583334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.