ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2019
Pharmacists' Patient Care Process: A State "Scope of Practice" Perspective.
Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding metabolic complication management after solid organ transplantation among medical staff in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Pharmacist-Led Diagnostics: A New Frontier in Antimicrobial Stewardship.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Federal pharmacist Paxlovid prescribing authority: A model policy or impediment to optimal care?Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Article
- Pharmacy-Based Point-of-Care Testing: How a "Standard of Care" Approach Can Facilitate Sustainability.Innovations in pharmacy · 2021Article
- The Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Pharmacist: A Call to Action.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- How Governor Directives Changed Health Workforce Flexibility in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
- Pharmacy staff willingness to establish pre-exposure prophylaxis-based collaborative practice agreements in the Southeast United States.Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhAArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveExplore the intersection of the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process (PPCP) and state laws in order to identify laws that may impede the delivery of optimal patient care. SUMMARY: A review of the PPCP identified six areas in which state laws can limit full pharmacist engagement: 1) ordering and interpreting laboratory tests; 2) participating in a collaborative practice agreement; 3) independently prescribing certain medications; 4) independently adapting medications; 5) administering medications; and 6) effective delegation. A framework is put forth to organize how these scope of practice matters are interrelated.
conclusionFor pharmacists to fully engage in the PPCP, state laws must enable full participation. By unleashing pharmacists to fully engage in the process, patient care delivery and outcomes can be improved, and total health care costs can be reduced.
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.