ArticlePharmacogenomics2016
Evaluation of a pharmacogenetic educational toolkit for community pharmacists.
Article in Pharmacogenomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing feasibility of delivering pharmacogenetic testing in a community pharmacy setting.Pharmacogenomics · 2017Trial
- International expert perspectives on pharmacogenomics in pharmacy education: a qualitative study with implications for South Africa.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Investigation of community pharmacists' knowledge and attitudes of pharmacogenomics testing: implication for improved pharmacogenomic testing practice.Human genomics · 2024Article
- Public perceptions of pharmacogenomic services in Ireland - Are people with chronic disease more likely to want service availability than those without? A questionnaire study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2022Article
- Co-designing a community pharmacy pharmacogenomics testing service in the UK.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Independent Community Pharmacists' Experience in Offering Pharmacogenetic Testing.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Delivery of Pharmacogenetic Testing with or without Medication Therapy Management in a Community Pharmacy Setting.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Patient characteristics, experiences and perceived value of pharmacogenetic testing from a single testing laboratory.Pharmacogenomics · 2019Article
- Qualitative user evaluation of a revised pharmacogenetic educational toolkit.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2018Article
- Development and Initial Assessment of a Patient Education Video about Pharmacogenetics.Journal of personalized medicine · 2017Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimOver the past several decades, the roles and services of community pharmacists have expanded beyond traditional medical dispensation and compounding, and include health services such as vaccinations, and clinical testing and screening. Incorporating pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing into the menu of pharmacy services is logical and feasible; however, few pharmacists have experience with PGx testing, and few educational resources about PGx are available to support the uptake of PGx testing in community pharmacies.
methodsWe developed a toolkit of four resources to assist pharmacists to provide PGx testing. We conducted a survey of pharmacists in North Carolina to evaluate each component of the toolkit and the toolkit as a whole.
resultsA total of 380 respondents completed the evaluation of one or more toolkit components (344 evaluated all four components and the overall toolkit). Most respondents (84%) have never ordered or used PGx test results. Though the usability of the toolkit overall was below average (65.1 on a range of 0-100), individual components were perceived as useful and more than 75% of pharmacists reported that they would use the toolkit components when offering testing, with the result summary sheet receiving the highest score (4.01 out of 5). Open-text comments highlighted the need for more patient-friendly language and formatting.
conclusionThe majority of pharmacist respondents scored the components of the toolkit favorably. The next steps will be to revise and assess use of the toolkit in community pharmacy settings.
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.