ArticleAIMS public health2018
Community pharmacists' attitudes towards patient leaflets: Exploring perceptions underlying an electronic local production of tailored written information.
Article in AIMS public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient Information Leaflets of Drugs Used in Cardiometabolic Disorders: Suitability for Use by Older Persons.Portuguese journal of public health · 2023Article
- Pharmacists' Perceptions of the Benefits and Challenges of Electronic Product Information System Implementation in Hong Kong: Mixed-Method Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLow health literacy in Portugal, revealed by limited patients' knowledge of their medication, may be improved by written information that is individually tailored for each patient. Tailored content can be produced through computer software and delivered by community pharmacies to patients.
objectiveTo assess community pharmacists' real-life management, usage and perceived utility of software developed to produce individually tailored patient leaflets at community pharmacies.
methodsThe software contained five different pharmacist-selected clinical information fields which allows for the adjustment of information to each patient's information needs. Using an exploratory study design, community pharmacists' perceptions were purposively selected and qualitatively assessed. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and iteratively coded using a thematic approach outlined by attitudinal theory.
resultsEight participants took part in the study. Emerging codes led to the construction of two main themes: Current PLs usage in Portuguese community pharmacy; and Tailored PLs usage in Portuguese community pharmacy. Pharmacists exhibited a generally positive attitude concerning the relevance and use of patient leaflets to address individual patient's information needs, including an improvement in health literacy. The model was considered effective, functional, satisfying and user-friendly.
conclusionAlthough additional studies are needed, the introduction of a leaflet-tailoring software in Portuguese community pharmacies seems to be feasible as an additional resource to improve the quality of patient information and counselling. The next research steps should address the impact on patients' medicines-related information, including the level to which patients are able to correctly interpret the information and to adjust accordingly their health behaviours. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The software fits present community pharmacy practice and routines, bringing advantages to pharmacists' willingness to deliver meaningful written information to patients, thus contributing to improved patient health literacy.
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.