Drug-related problems (DRPs) differ not only in clinical importance but also in how quickly harm may occur, how many variables must be integrated, how much information is missing, how modifiable the problem is, and whether pharmacist effort is likely to generate meaningful value. This paper develops a risk-based method for differentiating pharmacist responses after a DRP has been recognised. A structured conceptual-development approach was used. Contemporary evidence on pharmacist prioritisation, medication-related harm, regimen complexity, clinical decision-making, preventability, intervention outcomes, implementation, and economic value was used to define non-redundant decision dimensions. Evidence-supported premises were kept separate from the article’s proposed integrative logic. The framework was constructed as a context-sensitive decision method rather than as a validated score. Five dimensions emerged as analytically distinct: urgency/time-to-harm, complexity, uncertainty, preventability/modifiability, and expected intervention value. Urgency determines how long a response can safely wait; the remaining dimensions shape what kind of response is proportionate. The proposed method therefore allows immediate intervention, structured review, information gathering, escalation or referral, and monitored reassessment to be considered as different response routes rather than assuming that every identified DRP warrants the same intensity of action. The dimensions may conflict, and no numerical weights, universal cut-offs, or performance claims are proposed. Risk-based pharmacist triage is proposed as a method for matching response intensity and type to the characteristics of a DRP. Its value is conceptual and operational at this stage. Reliability, prospective decision performance, patient and process outcomes, implementation burden, equity, and external transferability require empirical evaluation before the method could be treated as a validated clinical instrument.
