ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Why Did I Consult My Pharmacist about Herbal and Dietary Supplements? An Online Survey Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic in Malaysia.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the Dietary Supplement Use During COVID-19: Insights from Community Pharmacists, Pharmacy Staff, Academics, and Industry Experts.Journal of integrative and complementary medicine · 2024Article
- Patterns of self-medication and intention to seek pharmacist guidance among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic in Macao: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Chronobiological Efficacy of Combined Therapy of Pelargonium Sidoides and Melatonin in Acute and Persistent Cases of COVID-19: A Hypothetical Approach.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Review
- How Internet Websites Portray Herbal Vitality Products ContainingInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Herbal and dietary supplements (HDSs) are frequently obtained from community pharmacies, but community pharmacists (CPs) have been underutilized for information regarding them. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of, factors behind, and reasons for consultation with CPs among HDS consumers in Malaysia. A cross-sectional study using an online survey was conducted among conveniently sampled individuals in Malaysia. Reasons for consultation or non-consultation with CPs about HDSs were sought from the respondents. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictors of consultation with CPs. Overall, 40.3% (239/593) of participants consulted CPs about the HDSs that they purchased. The participants were predominantly unmarried (362/588, 61.6%) and belonged to the 18-29 age group (332/593, 56%). The multivariate analysis showed that a suburban residential setting was the only significant predictor for consultation with CPs (adjusted odds ratio = 0.390, 95% CI = 0.260-0.583). Respondents who consulted CPs generally agreed that the CPs were the right people to consult on HDSs (mean = 4.37, SD = 0.73). However, their discussion with CPs regarding HDSs mostly revolved around the benefits and directions for use, but little on the potential risks. Meanwhile, most respondents who did not consult CPs agreed that they had never thought of consulting CPs about their HDS use (mean = 3.45, SD = 1.02). The majority of them referred to the Internet (61.3%, 217/354) and social media (59.9%, 212/354) for information about HDSs. The findings from this study show that more efforts are warranted in encouraging consumers to consult CPs about their HDS use and to enhance their awareness of the roles of CPs in ensuring the safe use of HDSs.
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.