Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36443800›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2022

Longitudinal study of Good Pharmacy Practice roles covered at the annual world pharmacy congresses 2003-2019.

Zuzana Kusynová, Hendrika A van den Ham, Hubert G M Leufkens, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Strategic infrastructure planning for the evolution of 2030 community pharmacy.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Assessing the Indicators of Good Pharmacy Practice in Community Pharmacies: A Cross-Sectional Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zuzana KusynováInternational Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP), The Hague, The Netherlands.
Hendrika A van den HamUtrecht WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands. h.a.vandenham@uu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1339-9818
Hubert G M LeufkensUtrecht WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Aukje K Mantel-TeeuwisseUtrecht WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally accepted roles of pharmacists are described in the Good Pharmacy Practice (GPP) standards, published by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) in 2011. These standards provide a wide-ranging description of four main roles pharmacists fulfil. The global platform, where pertinent discussions around excellence and innovation in various pharmacy roles take place, is the annual congress of the pharmacy organisation representing the profession globally, FIP.

objectivesGiven the world pharmacy congresses present and reflect on the most topical and contemporary matters, this longitudinal study aimed at creating a historical overview of the frequency of appearance of the different GPP roles in the programmes of the past 17 congresses (2003-2019). This is to distinguish the dominance of different roles over time and thus their relevance for the profession.

methodsThe GPP standards served as a framework to create a set of keywords that were analysed for their frequencies of appearance in the programmes through text analysis. Trends in the four overarching GPP roles and at individual keyword level were analysed descriptively over time.

resultsThe study found that all four GPP roles appeared in the programme each year and none of them was significantly missing, neither in the decade preceding the publication of the GPP standards nor in the decade thereafter. Role 3 "Maintain and improve professional performance" was most frequently represented, also demonstrating an upward trend in appearance, together with Role 4: "Contribute to improve effectiveness of the health-care system and public health". Trends emerged towards patient-centred clinical focus and positioning pharmacy as an important player in the health-care system-observed also at individual keywords level in areas such as health promotion-away from the more traditional product-centred practice roles such as compounding.

conclusionsGPP roles have been already covered by the FIP annual congresses (long) before 2011, when the GPP roles were formally adopted, and they stayed relevant in the decade after. The more pronounced dominance toward the roles related to improving professional performance and positioning pharmacy are in line with the trend that the rather technical topics in pharmacy are increasingly covered by specialised meetings and that the FIP annual congresses have moved toward more general, scholarly platforms for dialogue and conversation.

Indexed as

Congress programmesEvolutionGood Pharmacy Practice (GPP)PharmacyPharmacy profession

Identifiers

PMID36443800
PMCPMC9706975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.