ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Islamic reasoning and the use of prohibited medicines among Muslim patients: a qualitative study.
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.
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
introductionMuslim patients may avoid medicines containing ingredients prohibited by their faith (haram), such as alcohol, gelatine, or porcine derivatives. While Islamic law permits exceptions based on necessity (darura) or biotransformation (istihala), the way these principles influence medication adherence and shape patient-healthcare provider (HCP) interaction is underexplored.
aimTo explore how Muslims apply Islamic reasoning to medication adherence decisions involving medicines containing haram ingredients.
methodThirteen ethnically diverse Muslim adults were purposively sampled for semi-structured interviews. A prior scoping review and mosque-based public and patient involvement (PPI) informed the interview guide. Interview data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA), with themes constructed inductively. Data interpretation was guided by the Necessity-Concerns Framework (NCF) and locus of control (LOC) theory. Rigour was supported through member checking, peer debriefing and reflexive journalling.
resultsFour themes emerged: (1) Halal as worldview: the halal-haram spectrum functioned as a moral lens for daily behaviour and intake, extending to medication use. (2) Motivations for consumption: halal was linked to perceived health and spiritual benefit, while haram signalled impurity and harm. (3) Minor illness or major disease: darura and istihala were applied flexibly in chronic or life-threatening illness, whereas participants avoided prohibited medicines for minor conditions, favouring complementary remedies. Practical workarounds included switching dosage forms or opening gelatine capsules and discarding the shell to minimise religious harm. Decisions were shaped by perceived severity, symptom burden, financial considerations, and the extent to which HCPs were perceived as trustworthy, culturally competent, and responsive to religious disclosure, all of which influenced adherence. (4) Personalised care: participants valued shared decision-making, transparent disclosure of religiously relevant excipients, and a reasonable degree of religious literacy among HCPs; scepticism about halal certification underscored the need for clearer labelling and guidance.
conclusionIslamic reasoning influenced how participants engaged with medicines deemed haram. Supporting adherence requires pharmacy practice that incorporates religious literacy and responds to concerns about transparent labelling and faith-sensitive communication. These steps will strengthen patient-centred care by aligning religious and ethical reasoning with treatment decisions, fostering trust, enhancing adherence, and supporting more equitable care for Muslim patients.
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.