ArticleHeliyon2022
Knowledge, practices, and patterns of data confidentiality among pharmacists in a developing country.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ethical considerations and concerns in the implementation of AI in pharmacy practice: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Increased application of electronic health information systems led to the buildup of patient information and facilitated access to this data. Consequently, the confidentiality of this information became an ethical challenge to medical teams' members including pharmacists. However, no study has been conducted to assess pharmacists' knowledge or practices of data confidentiality. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the current practices and knowledge of pharmacists concerning data confidentiality. Methods: This was a cross sectional study that included clinical pharmacists in tertiary hospitals and health care centers in Jordan. Data was collected through phone or face to face interviews using a data collection sheet. All continuous data was presented as median ± interquartile range (IQR) and categorical data as frequency (%). One way Chi square was used to check significant differences among categorical groups. Predictors that may affect knowledge and behavior scores were screened using simple linear regression. Results: A total of 388 pharmacists were interviewed with a mean age of 39.59 ± 8.32 years, with an average experience of 12.55 ± 7.30 years. Pharmacists relied on their personal experience to resolve ethical dilemmas (n = 274, 70.3%), and when they seek advice, their work colleagues (n = 180, 46.4%) %), followed by the head of departments (144 n; 37.1%), were the main source of advice on ethical issues. The overall median knowledge score of pharmacists about data confidentiality was 2.0 out of 5.0 (IQR = 2.0). A considerable percentage of the pharmacists was willing to share information with family members without asking for permission from the patient (n = 98, 25.3%). Pharmacists had a median behavior score of 3.5 out of 4.0 (IQR = 0.4) regarding practices related to data confidentiality, where the majority of them handled medical information from the patient with great confidentiality (304 n, 78.4%), and 85.8% of them (n = 333) gave patient's sexual diseases-related medical information the highest confidentiality. However, based on univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis, none of the examined sociodemographic variables significantly predicted pharmacists' knowledge or behaviors (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Pharmacists are aware of the importance of confidentiality issues of their patients. However, a number of gaps in their knowledge and practices of data confidentiality were identified. Training that targets these gaps in their knowledge, and rectifies incorrect practices is needed during university education and as part of their continuous medical education.
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.