ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2020
"The Difference between Plan b and ella®? They're Basically the Same Thing": Results from a Mystery Client Study.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral emergency contraception practices of community pharmacies: a mystery caller study in the capital of Germany, Berlin.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Article
- Oral Emergency Contraception Provision in the Veterans Health Administration: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- The Quality of Counselling for Oral Emergency Contraceptive Pills-A Simulated Patient Study in German Community Pharmacies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Pharmacy staff can serve an important role educating patients about emergency contraceptive pills (ECP), particularly ulipristal acetate (UPA), which requires a prescription. We conducted a secondary analysis of a previously completed mystery client study, assessing accuracy of information provided by pharmacy staffers to patients inquiring by telephone about filling a prescription for UPA. From the period December 2013 to July 2014, researchers used a mystery client methodology, contacting 198 retail pharmacies in Hawai'i. Researchers posed as patients or providers attempting to fill a prescription for UPA. During the course of the call, they asked about differences between UPA and levonorgestrel ECPs. Nearly half of all pharmacy staffers were unfamiliar with UPA. The majority of responses describing differences between the medications were incorrect or misleading, such as responses implying that UPA is an abortifacient. Lack of familiarity and incorrect information provided by pharmacy staffers may act as additional barriers in patient access to UPA. Health practitioners prescribing UPA should ensure patients receive evidence-based counseling at the time of prescription, while efforts should also be made to improve pharmacy staff familiarity with emergency contraceptive options.
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.