ArticleActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2020
Evaluating Pharmacist's Patient Care Process in Shiraz, using a newly-validated questionnaire: The First Report from Iran.
Article in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design, Development and Evaluation of an Application based on Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) for Over-The-Counter (OTC) Therapy: An Educational Interventions in Community Pharmacists.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Pharmacists' Patient Care Process (PPCP) as one of many inter-related foundations for the delivery of evidence-based and outcomes-focused patient care has a positive trend in academic literatures in the world. Unfortunately, PPCP has not been establish well in community pharmacies in Iran, yet. This study was performed to explore the current status of the provision and perception toward patient care services and finally evaluate professional competency of pharmacists about PPCP implementation, in both patients and pharmacist's perspectives.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using two self-administrated Likert-based questionnaires_ one for pharmacists and another one for patients. In total, 121 pharmacists and 479 patients participated to the study. Questionnaires were distributed and collected in the Shiraz during the Oct 2017 till Jun 2018. Obtained data were analyzed through the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 25. In addition, the competency to PPCP implementation was classified to three groups _good, moderate, and weak _ based on achieving ≥75%, 50%-75%, and <50% of the dimensions' total score, respectively.
resultsThe pharmacist's age range was 23-76 years (mean age: 40.61±12.85 years). Their Competency to PPCP implementation was good (43.8%), moderate (52%), and just 4% weak. Patient's response to PPCP was 11.2% good, 50.7% moderate and 35.6% weak.
conclusionBesides promotion of public awareness about PPCP, improvement of pharmacists' motivation toward these services seems necessary. In addition, the introduced instrument may be useful for practice of pharmacists, but it should be used cautiously until it is tested among clients of pharmacies known to provide all levels of pharmacy care within pharmacy stores.
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.