Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30004399›Full record

ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2018

Double-Dosing and Other Dangers with Non-Prescription Medicines: Pharmacists' Views and Experiences.

Natalie Gauld, Tracey Sullivan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Natalie GauldNatalie Gauld Ltd., P. O. Box 9349, Newmarket, Auckland 1149, New Zealand. n.gauld@gmail.com.
Tracey SullivanIndependent Researcher, Wellington, New Zealand. traceyinwales@yahoo.com.
Greenlane Clinical Centre · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to explore pharmacists' views on reclassifications from pharmacy-only to general sales and their experiences with the supply of these medicines, in addition to pharmacists' views on the reclassification of the shingles vaccine and sildenafil to be available through 'accredited' pharmacists. New Zealand community pharmacists were surveyed in 2013 with a written questionnaire of six Likert-style or open-ended questions sent to Pharmacy Guild member pharmacies. The analysis involved descriptive statistics. Responses were received from 246 pharmacies. Two thirds of pharmacists supported the reclassification of the shingles vaccine and sildenafil, although 14% disagreed with the sildenafil reclassification. Over 90% of pharmacists disagreed with the reclassification of paracetamol and ibuprofen liquids, omeprazole, naproxen, and oxymetazoline from pharmacy-only medicine to general sales. This opinion was strongest for omeprazole. With liquid paracetamol and ibuprofen, pharmacists described consumer confusion with dosing, and particularly potentially doubling-up on liquid analgesics/antipyretics including using both prescription and non-prescription variants. Many reported giving safety advice frequently. Anti-inflammatories and omeprazole were also subject to potential double-dosing, as well as requests by consumers with contraindications, precautions, and drug interactions, and for inappropriate indications. Pharmacists described various interventions, including some that were potentially life-saving. Pharmacy availability of medicines provides the potential for intervention that would not happen in a general sales environment.

Indexed as

community pharmacynon-prescription drugspharmacist interventionreclassificationself-medication

Identifiers

PMID30004399
PMCPMC6165278
OpenAlexW2810554326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.