ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Drug Information Services in Low-Resource Setting: A Responsibility of Pharmacists or Pharmacologists or Both the Professions Conjointly.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the pharmacy professionals' understanding and viewpoints on drug information center (DIC) services and differences, if any, with pharmacologist's survey conducted earlier. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn electronic cross-sectional knowledge, practice, and attitude survey was carried out. A questionnaire in the form of the hyperlink was sent to pharmacy professionals through e-mail, Facebook messenger, and WhatsApp. Factors linked to pharmacy professionals' vision in expanding countrywide DIC services were studied with logistic regression in R.
resultsA total of 125 pharmacy professionals responded. The participant believing in the published literature as a standard reference for establishing and running the DIC services; participants identifying more challenges in the day-to-day DIC functioning; and participants believing in the ability of DIC in reducing morbidity, mortality, and cost of care had 4.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97-6.44), 4.24 (95% CI = 0.97-6.44), and 2.43 (95% CI = 0.97-6.44) times association with good knowledge score. Good attitude scores were discovered of participants working in fully and partially functional DIC (odds ratio [OR] = 9.66, CI = 0.97-6.44 and OR = 9.49, CI = 0.97-6.44) to participants not involved in DIC duties. The participant who understood DIC services' real purpose had 2.83 (95% CI = 0.97-6.44) times association with good practice scores. Overall, pharmacy professionals carried better attitude scores, but lesser knowledge, and practice scores than pharmacology professionals.
conclusionLower knowledge and practice score of pharmacy professionals asks for training in critical appraisal of published literature and due modifications in graduate and postgraduate curricula. A collaborative approach between pharmacists and pharmacologists is needed to improve the quality of drug information services and evidence-based medicine practice in low-resource countries like India.
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.