ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2011
Constraints and perspectives of pharmacists counseling patients with depression at hospital discharge.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Following up patients with depression after hospital discharge: a mixed methods approach.International journal of mental health systems · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective of the studyThis study aims to explore experiences, barriers and enabling factors during an antidepressant counseling study as well as to explore future initiatives.
setting11 Flemish psychiatric hospitals.
methodFocus group discussions were organized. Pharmacists who could not be present at a focus group discussion answered the questions of the interview guide on paper. The focus group discussions were tape recorded, verbatim transcribed and analyzed using NVivo7-software applying a framework approach.
main outcome measureEvaluation of barriers, enabling factors, negative and positive experiences during the study. Suggestions for future initiatives.
resultsFor experiences, barriers and enabling factors, five categories were identified: individual patient contacts, interdisciplinary contacts, hospital management, study performance and study support. There existed differences in culture between hospitals on how they appreciated the role of the clinical pharmacist. A major difference between hospitals was the interdisciplinary relations. Negative experiences and barriers were: the absence of openness for a role for the pharmacist in the team, difficult interdisciplinary communication, the uncertainty about the time of discharge, the need of patients to tell their story and the timing of the intervention. Positive experiences and enabling factors included the individual focus of the intervention, the position of the pharmacist as a reliable health care professional, the pharmacist as the key person in this study, the integration of the pharmacist in the team, the gained knowledge and skills of the pharmacist and the professional study support. Future initiatives depend upon human and other resources. There is a demand for more information by the patient. A more structured way of working is necessary. The provision of medication information can be performed at different points in time using different formats.
conclusionParticipation in a clinical pharmacy study was well appreciated by the pharmacists. Future initiatives were welcomed if they remain feasible within actual job responsibilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21365402What 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.