Cited by 46Ethics in medical practiceEthics and bioethics in healthcareEthics in Business and Education

A Case-Centered Approach to Nursing Ethics Education: A Qualitative Study

Open access
Lee, Won, Choi, Sungkyoung, Kim, Sujeong, Min, Ari·2020·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract

Nurses deal with ethical decisions as they protect patients' rights, but a consensus on effective approaches to nursing ethics education is lacking. The "four topics" method can facilitate decision-making when nurses experience ethical dilemmas in practice. This study aimed to describe nursing students' perspectives on and experiences of a case-centered approach to nursing ethics education using the four topics method. This qualitative study consisted of two phases. First, we delivered case-centered nursing ethics education sessions to nursing students using the four topics method. Then, we conducted two focus group discussions that explored students' perspectives on and experiences of nursing ethics education. Data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Four themes were identified: the importance of ethics education as perceived by nursing students, problems in current nursing ethics education, the experience of case-centered nursing ethics education using the four topics approach, and suggestions for improving nursing ethics education. The case-centered approach using the four topics method is effective in enhancing nursing students' nursing ethics ability. It is crucial to understand that nursing students would like to set up their own ethical standards and philosophy. Continuous efforts to encourage students' participation and to provide ethical reflection opportunities during clinical practice are needed to better connect theory with clinical practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/ijerph17217748

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The long-term stability of teaching outcomes and the efficiency of translating knowledge comprehension into clinical decision-making capabilities remain critical challenges to be addressed in nursing ethics education.

    “These studies indicate that the long-term stability of teaching outcomes and the efficiency of translating knowledge comprehension into clinical decision-making capabilities remain critical challenges to be addressed [11–21].”

    From Exploring the integration of AI and national quality courses in China: a study on teaching practices in nursing smart education (2025) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Results (section 3.2.2; page not provided) report that students struggled to apply classroom ethics knowledge and judge ethical issues in clinical practice, supporting the knowledge-to-decision-making challenge. Students also said course content was not memorable, but the study did not assess the long-term stability of teaching outcomes or measure how efficiently knowledge became clinical decision-making capability. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Small group discussions are appropriate when healthcare professionals or students are unwilling to stand out by asking questions or giving individual opinions in learning situations with many participants.

    “Small group discussions are appropriate when healthcare professionals or students are unwilling to stand out by asking questions or giving individual opinions in learning situations in which many people participate [63].”

    From Ethics education to support ethical competence learning in healthcare: an integrative systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [63]

    Section 3.2 reports that participants recommended small-group education to encourage participation, especially in a Korean cultural setting where people dislike standing out by asking questions or offering opinions. The claim extends that recommendation beyond the paper’s nursing-ethics education context to healthcare professionals or students generally; the cited passage does not establish that broader scope. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [38]Jonsen A.R. Sieger M. Winslade W.J. Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine 8th ed. McGraw-Hill New York, NY, USA 2015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, W., Choi, S., Kim, S., & Min, A.
Affiliations
  • Chung-Ang University (KR)
  • Yonsei University (KR)
  • Catholic University of Korea (KR)
Corresponding author
Min, Ari
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-10-23
Volume
17
Issue
21
Pages
7748
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3093844245
Cited by
46
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • YUHSpace (Yonsei University Medical Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Chung-Ang University Research Scholarship Grants (not applicable)
  • Korea National Institute for Bioethics Policy (not applicable)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
nursing ethics education, nursing students' perspectives, ethical decision-making, ethical dilemmas, ethical reflection, clinical practice, student participation
MeSH terms
Adult, Education, Nursing, Ethics, Nursing, Female, Humans, Male, Students, Nursing, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review