Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12512153›Full record

ReviewPharmacy world & science : PWS2002

Data collection methods for analyzing the quality of the dispensing in pharmacies.

Francisco Caamaño, Alberto Ruano, Adolfo Figueiras, J J Gestal-Otero

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francisco CaamañoDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Alberto Ruano
Adolfo Figueiras
J J Gestal-Otero
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review and discuss the advantages and limitations of the different data collection methods for analyzing the dispensing quality in community pharmacies.

methodsA bibliographic search was carried out in MEDLINE (1980-2000). Articles with Medical Subject Heading (Mesh) "pharmacies" written in English and Spanish that evaluated the quality of dispensing (structure, process or outcome) were selected.

resultsVarious data collection methods were observed. To analyze the quality of the structure, questionnaires and pharmacist interviews were used. To analyze the quality of the process, self-completed records, external observers and simulated clients were used. For analyzing the quality of the outcome, questionnaires, client interviews, and biologic samples were collected.

conclusionsThe analysis of quality of structure can be useful as a first approach, however, this method may lack sensitivity. On the other hand, the analysis of outcome may be excessively complex and difficult to use, except for experimental or observational studies with large resources. Therefore, an analysis of the quality of the process is the best option. Methods utilizing external observers and simulated clients may best conjugate both internal and external validity.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesData CollectionHumansOutcome Assessment, Health Care

Identifiers

PMID12512153
OpenAlexW155671345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.