ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2015
The effects of educational interventions on pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards low back pain.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Community Pharmacist's Role in Detecting Low Back Pain, and Patient Attitudes-A Cross-Sectional Observational Study in Italian Community Pharmacies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Observational
- Article
- An Electronic Clinical Decision Support System for the Management of Low Back Pain in Community Pharmacy: Development and Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- A web-based training program to support chronic kidney disease screening by community pharmacists.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
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
backgroundPractitioner beliefs and attitudes towards low back pain (LBP) influence treatment decisions. Little is known about pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP.
objectivesTo investigate the effect of educational interventions on pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP. Setting Sydney Metropolitan Area.
methodsKnowledge, attitudes and beliefs was measured using the "Pharmacists' Back Beliefs Questionnaire", with items from two previously reported questionnaires on back beliefs. Responses from pharmacists attending a 2-h educational workshop on LBP (n = 204) and pharmacists recruiting participants for a LBP clinical trial (n = 66) were compared to responses from a control group of pharmacists (n = 65) to allow an evaluation of the two interventions. Responses from workshop participants were also evaluated before and after the session. Participants indicated their agreement with statements about LBP on a 5-point Likert scale. Preferred responses were based on guidelines for the evidence-based management of LBP. The primary analysis evaluated total score on the nine-inevitability items of the Back Beliefs Questionnaire ("inevitability score").
main outcome measureInevitability score.
resultsThere was no significant difference in inevitability score between LBP clinical trial pharmacists and the control group [mean difference (MD) 0.47 (95 % CI -1.35 to 2.29; p = 0.61)]. The educational workshop led to a significant and favourable change in inevitability score (MD 7.23 p < 0.001) and notable changes in responses to misconceptions regarding bed rest and the need for imaging (p < 0.001) among participating pharmacists.
conclusionsPharmacists attending the educational workshop provided the most compelling evidence that education specifically aimed at delivering evidence-based information can be successful in changing practitioner knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards LBP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25851502What 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.