ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2023
Guessability of standard pharmaceutical pictograms in members of the Nigerian public.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A qualitative study to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders regarding pharmaceutical pictograms in Pakistan.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pharmaceutical pictograms are standardized images used to visually convey medication instructions. Very little is known about the ability of Africans to interpret these images. Objectives: Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the guessability (ability to correctly guess meaning) of selected International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) and United States Pharmacopoeia (USP) pictograms in members of the Nigerian public. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out between May and August 2021 on 400 randomly sampled members of Nigerian public. Selected pictograms (24 FIP and 22 USP pictograms) were grouped and printed on A3 sheets of paper which were used to interview members of the public who fulfilled the study's' eligibility criteria. Respondents were asked to guess the meanings of either the FIP or USP pictograms, and their answers written down verbatim. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to report the data collected. Results: Four hundred respondents were interviewed, with 200 respondents each assessing the guessability of the FIP and USP pictograms. The guessability of assessed FIP pictograms ranged between 3.5 and 95%, while that for the USP pictograms was 27.5-97%. Eleven FIP and Thirteen USP pictograms respectively achieved the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) comprehensibility cutoff point of 67%. Guessing performance (the total number of pictograms correctly guessed by an individual) of respondents that assessed the FIP pictograms was significantly associated with their age ( Conclusions: Guessability of both pictogram types varied widely, but the guessability of the USP pictograms was generally better than that for the FIP pictograms. Many of the tested pictograms may however need to be redesigned before they can be correctly interpreted by members of the Nigerian public.
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.