ArticleBMJ open2020
Scoping review of pharmacy-based initiatives for preventing unintended pregnancy: protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Screenings for Preconception Health Interventions at a Community Pharmacy.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDue to a high global incidence of unintended pregnancy, finding novel ways to increase the accessibility of contraceptive products and information is critical. One proposed strategy is to use the accessibility of community pharmacies and expand the role of pharmacists to deliver these services. This protocol reports the methods of a proposed scoping review of pharmacy-based initiatives for preventing unintended pregnancy. We intend to identify the range of interventions employed by pharmacists worldwide and their outcomes and aim to infer the value of task sharing for reducing certain access and equity barriers to contraception. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol was developed with guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology for Scoping Reviews. Reporting is compliant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocols. The scoping review will be reported according to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were systematically searched for relevant literature published in English from 2000, on 22 August 2019. Two authors will individually screen articles for eligibility in Covidence and data will be charted and reported using a tool developed for the purpose of this review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations with relevant stakeholders. Ethical approval is not required as we will be using data from publicly available literature sources. We will map available evidence across the breadth of studies that have been conducted and identify the effectiveness and acceptability of interventions.
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.