ArticleDigital health
Immunisation provider experiences with an automated short message service-based active surveillance system for monitoring adverse events following immunisation: A qualitative descriptive study.
Article in Digital health. 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCurrently, active surveillance systems to monitor adverse events following immunisation are limited to hospitals, and medical and immunisation clinics. Globally, community pharmacies represent a significant destination for immunisation services. However, until recently, pharmacies lacked active surveillance systems. We therefore wished to explore pharmacists' experiences with SmartVax: an active surveillance system that has recently been integrated for use in Australian community pharmacies. Specifically, we wished to explore pharmacists' perceived (1) benefits of using SmartVax, (2) areas for improvement in the system, and (3) issues with future/ongoing access to the system.
methodsThe present study forms the qualitative arm of a convergent mixed-methods pilot study. In the present study, we performed semi-structured interviews with pharmacist immunisers after a 21- to 22-week trial period with SmartVax. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts was performed independently by two researchers in QSR NVivo 12, using the framework method.
resultsFifteen participants completed the semi-structured interviews. A broad range of perceived benefits were cited by participants, including the usability of SmartVax, the ease of patient follow-up facilitated by the system, and enhancement to the patient-pharmacist relationship. Participants voiced a desire for the system to have more granularity and a faster response time in the report generated for pharmacies. When asked about issues with future/ongoing access to SmartVax, cost concerns of the system were the prevailing theme.
conclusionsThe present study suggests that, among pharmacist immuniser end-users of SmartVax, the system is perceived to be easy-to-use, facilitates patient follow-up, and enhances the patient-pharmacist relationship.
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.