Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33130109›Full record

SynthesisContraception2021

Patient and pharmacist perspectives on pharmacist-prescribed contraception: A systematic review.

L M Eckhaus, A J Ti, K M Curtis, A L Stewart-Lynch, M K Whiteman

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Benefits of Hormonal Contraception Across the Lifespan: A Case-Based, Interactive Curriculum.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

L M EckhausDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341, United States; Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, 1299 Bethel Valley Rd, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, United States. Electronic address: ofe5@cdc.gov.
A J TiDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341, United States. Electronic address: obd6@cdc.gov.
K M CurtisDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341, United States. Electronic address: kmc6@cdc.gov.
A L Stewart-LynchDuquesne University School of Pharmacy, 600 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15282, United States. Electronic address: stewar14@duq.edu.
M K WhitemanDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341, United States. Electronic address: acq5@cdc.gov.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIncreasingly, states authorize pharmacists to prescribe hormonal contraception to patients without a prescription from another healthcare provider. The purpose of this review is to investigate pharmacist and patient perspectives on pharmacist-prescribed contraception in the United States. STUDY

designWe searched Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from inception through July 10, 2019. We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies, quantitative surveys, observational studies, and randomized trials in the United States. Risk of bias was assessed using tools for quantitative and qualitative studies.

resultsFifteen studies met inclusion criteria, including studies on pharmacists and student pharmacists (n = 9), patients (n = 5), and both (n = 1). Study samples ranged from local to national. Studies had moderate to high risk of bias, primarily due to low response rates and lack of validated instruments. Most pharmacists (57-96%) across four studies were interested in participating in pharmacist-prescribed contraception services. Among patients, 63-97% across three studies supported pharmacist-prescribed contraception, and 38-68% across four studies intended to participate in these services. At least half of pharmacists across four studies felt comfortable prescribing contraception, though pharmacists identified additional training needs. Pharmacists and patients identified several reasons for interest in pharmacist-prescribed contraception services, including increasing patient access, reducing unintended pregnancies, and offering professional development for pharmacists. They also identified barriers, including payment, time and resource constraints, liability, and patient health concerns.

conclusionsMost pharmacists and patients across 15 studies were interested in expanded access to contraception through pharmacist-prescribed contraception. Findings on facilitators and barriers may inform implementation efforts. IMPLICATIONS: Pharmacist-prescribed contraception is a strategy to expand patient access to contraception. Reducing barriers to implementation could improve participation among pharmacists and patients.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPharmacistsContraceptionFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHormonal ContraceptionHumansPregnancyUnited StatesContraceptionPharmacist-prescriptionPharmacyPharmacy accessSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33130109
PMCPMC11283818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.