ArticleBMC family practice2020
"What counts can't always be measured": a qualitative exploration of general practitioners' conceptualisation of quality for community pharmacy services.
Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a quality framework for community pharmacy: a systematic review of international literature.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts.Journal of health services research & policy · 2025Review
- Two-way Automated Text Messaging Support From Community Pharmacies for Medication Taking in Multiple Long-term Conditions: Human-Centered Design With Nominal Group Technique Development Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe expansion of community pharmacy services is one solution to relieve pressure on general practice in the United Kingdom (UK). There is a paucity of research of general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives of quality of care in the community pharmacy sector. The purpose of this study was to explore GPs': Conceptualisation of quality for community pharmacy services, including the management of acute (low acuity) conditions and defining indispensable aspects of the patient experience ('always events') Opinions regarding whether and how to measure quality in the community pharmacy sector
methodSemi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs in the UK. GPs were recruited using the snowballing technique and professional networks. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using an interpretive approach.
resultsInterviews were completed with 20 GPs from Scotland (n = 8) and England (n = 12). Multidimensional and inter-related concepts of quality were identified; most dimensions related to patient benefit, as well as impact on GP workload or other health service provision. Interviewees cautioned that "what counts can't always be measured". GPs' expectations of quality often mirrored those of their own sector, but were ambivalent about the adoption of a quality outcome framework-type approach. Pharmacist involvement was expected to ensure quality in the management of 'acute consultations', however, GPs lacked awareness of community pharmacy personnel type, roles and training. Interviewees' perceptions of quality varied by pharmacy type; independent pharmacies were sometimes associated with higher quality service delivery than larger chain organisations.
conclusionsQuality frameworks for community pharmacy services could be partly informed by GP experience and expectations, but need to be contextual to reflect differences between both settings. The importance of person-centred care, consistency and continuity was emphasised together with the need for competent personnel and privacy of interactions.
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.