ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2012
Using Think Aloud Protocols to Assess E-Prescribing in Community Pharmacies.
Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a tablet app designed to improve African Americans' screening colonoscopy rates.Translational behavioral medicine · 2020Trial
- Scoping review of health information technology usability methods leveraged in Africa.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- e-Prescribing: characterisation of patient safety hazards in community pharmacies using a sociotechnical systems approach.BMJ quality & safety · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThink aloud protocol has rarely been used as a method of data collection in community pharmacies. PURPOSE: The aim of the report is to describe how think aloud protocols were used to identify issues that arise when using e-prescribing technology in pharmacies. In this paper, we report on the benefits and challenges of using think aloud protocols in pharmacies to examine the use of e-prescribing systems.
methodsSixteen pharmacists and pharmacy technicians were recruited from seven community pharmacies in Wisconsin. Data were collected using direct observation alongside think aloud protocol. Direct observations and think aloud protocols took place between January-February, 2011. Participants were asked to verbalize their thoughts as they process electronic prescriptions.
resultsParticipants identify weaknesses in e-prescribing that they had previously not conceived. This created heightened awareness for vigilance when processing e-prescriptions. The main challenge with using think aloud protocols were interruptions in the pharmacy. Some participants found it difficult to remember to continue verbalizing during think aloud sessions.
conclusionThe use of think aloud protocols as method of data collection is a new way for understanding the issues related to technology use in community pharmacy practice. Think aloud protocol was beneficial in providing objective information on e-prescribing not based on pharmacist's or technician's opinion of the technology. This method provided detailed information and also a wide variety of real time challenges with e-prescribing technology in community pharmacies. Using this data collection method can help identify potential patient safety issues when using e-prescribing and suggestions for redesign.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.