ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2008
User satisfaction with services provided by a drug information center in Sudan.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers of healthcare professionals in utilizing the service of drugs and poison information Centre: A cross-sectional study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2022Article
- Assessment of the Use and Status of New Drug Information Centers in a Developing Country, Ethiopia: The Case of Public University Hospital Drug Information Centers.BioMed research international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe services of the Ministry of Health Drug Information Center--Khartoum State were evaluated by assessing users' satisfaction.
methodFour hundred and twenty-three subjects were recruited from center records using a systematic random sampling technique. Subjects who consented were interviewed by telephone using a specially designed semi-structured questionnaire. Descriptive as well as comparative analyses were carried out. Differences between groups were tested using the Chi-square test when applicable.
resultsThe majority of users surveyed (89.6%) had called the center from within Khartoum State and 10.4% of users had called from other states. Of the enquiries, 36.1% were from pharmacists, 29.5% from physicians, and 22.3% from laypersons. The vast majority (93.1%) of respondents were educated to degree level or higher. Approximately one fifth, one half, and one third of the users surveyed had consulted the center >5 times, 2-5 times, and once, respectively. More than 90% of users rated the services provided as good to excellent and 94.7% declared their probable intention to continue utilizing the center in the future.
conclusionThe center succeeded in satisfying and retaining its users by providing an acceptable quality of service.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18704750What 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.