Explaining professionalism in moral reasoning: a qualitative study

Abstract

Purpose

Professionalism is one of the most fundamental elements in judgment and moral reasoning and also an essential skill accompanied by other technical and scientific skills in the medical staff. Awareness of ethical aspects involves the clinical decision-making for patients. Therefore, this study aimed at explaining the role of professionalism in moral reasoning.

Patients and methods

This qualitative study was conducted on 17 faculty members and clinical students of medicine department. The participants were selected through purposive sampling method, and the data were collected via semistructured interviews after getting informed consent. Then, data were analyzed using conventional content analysis method.

Results

Three main categories and eleven subcategories were classified as follows: professionalism principles with four subscales such as communication with patients, trust building, satisfying the patients, and moralism; professional responsibility with four subscales such as fulfillment of duties, commitment to professional rules, maintaining professional position, and dignity of the patient; professional evidence with three subscales based on data analysis such as patient’s participation in decision-making, personal and other’s experiences, and professional knowledge.

Conclusion

Training qualified people in medicine is one of the important missions of the professors. Improving the professionalism in students enables them in moral reasoning. Training professional principles, responsibility, and using professional evidence are the strategies used for job commitment in moral reasoning, and emphasis on how to train medical ethics will support graduates.

Keywords:

• moral reasoning
• professionalism
• medicine
• qualitative study
• ethical decision making
• clinical practice

Acknowledgments

This study is a part of thesis written by Dr Farahnaz Kamali supported by Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. The authors appreciate the faculty members and students for their participations.

Author contributions

All authors contributed to data analysis, drafting and revising the article, gave final approval of the version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.