ArticleCureus2020
Cross-sectional Study on the Impact of Discount Pricing and Price Competition on Community Pharmacy Practice.
Article in Cureus, 2020. 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.
- On the "tightrope" of retail: reflections on ethical dilemmas faced by the pharmaceutical professionals in community pharmacies.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Unravelling the shift: exploring consumers' adoption or resistance of E-Pharmacy through behavioural reasoning theory.BMC public health · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Without stipulated legislation, a free pricing policy can lead to a disparity in prices among private healthcare setups. Competition is especially rampant among community pharmacies, especially in the Sabah state of Malaysia, where the recent years have witnessed the steady growth of pharmacy players from Peninsular Malaysia. Thus, this study aimed to examine the impact of price competition and discount pricing on the practice of community pharmacy in Sabah, Malaysia. Methods This was a cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire. Survey participants included community pharmacists practicing in Sabah. The validated and pilot-tested questionnaire consisted of three parts: background information of the pharmacy, attitudes and perception toward medicine prices, and practice of discount pricing. All required data were collected from community pharmacists practicing only in Sabah. Data were then analyzed by using descriptive, Chi-Square, and Kendall's tau-b tests. Results Of the 150 community pharmacists contacted, only 70 responded, providing a response rate of 47%. In terms of pharmacy type, 71% of the respondents were pharmacist-owned independent pharmacies, while 19% were pharmacy chains owned by community pharmacists. The remaining were pharmacies owned by non-pharmacists (10%). Sixty percent of the community pharmacies had been in existence for more than 10 years, with 12% in existence for less than two years, and 28% in existence for three to 10 years. More than 80% of the respondents stated that the business aspect of community pharmacy had overwhelmed the professional practice aspects and that community pharmacists have become providers of products instead of providers of care. In terms of professionalism, 87% also noted that they are being perceived as profiteering in the medicine business at the expense of patients. Conclusions The free market situation in Malaysia for medicine pricing has brought a detrimental consequence for community pharmacists with each one trying to undercut prices. Differing pricing mechanisms of medicines based on the quantity ordered contribute to the problem of discount pricing and price competition. Most community pharmacists, as indicated by this study, want the problem to be addressed.
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.