Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37214531›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2023

Pharmaceutical pictograms: User-centred redesign, selection and validation.

Rahul Malhotra, Yi Wen Tan, Sumithra Devi Suppiah, Sarah Siew Cheng Tay, Ngiap Chuan Tan, Jianying Liu, Gerald Choon-Huat Koh, Alexandre Chan, Régis Vaillancourt, PROMISE Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

10 authors.

Rahul MalhotraCentre for Ageing Research & Education, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Yi Wen TanCentre for Ageing Research & Education, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Sumithra Devi SuppiahCentre for Ageing Research & Education, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.
Sarah Siew Cheng TaySingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore.
Ngiap Chuan TanSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore.
Jianying LiuSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore.
Gerald Choon-Huat KohSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Alexandre ChanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy Practice, University of California, Irvine, USA.
Régis VaillancourtDepartment of Pharmacy, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Canada.
PROMISE Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: In an earlier study, several tested International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) pictograms did not achieve validity among older adults in Singapore. In this study, for 27 unvalidated FIP pictograms, we (1) developed variants of each pictogram, (2) elicited the most-preferred variant, and (3) assessed the validity of the most-preferred variant among older Singaporeans. Methods: In phase 1, up to three variants of the 27 pictograms were developed, based on older adults' feedback from a previous study. In phase 2, the most-preferred variant of 26 pictograms, which had two or three variants, was selected by 100 older participants. In phase 3, the 27 most-preferred variants (including the pictogram with only one variant) were assessed for validity - transparency and translucency - among 278 older participants (10 pictograms per participant). To evaluate transparency, participants were first asked: " Results: In phase 1, 77 variants of the 27 pictograms were developed. In phase 2, a majority of the most-preferred variants were selected by >50% participants. In phase 3, 10 (37.0%) of the 27 pictograms tested were considered valid, and five (18.5%) were partially valid. A higher proportion of pictograms portraying dose and route of administration and precautions were valid or partially valid, versus those depicting indications or side effects. Conclusion: Contextual redesigning and selection of pharmaceutical pictograms, which initially failed to achieve validity in a population, contributed to their validation. Innovation: The redesigned validated pictograms from this study can be incorporated into relevant patient information materials in clinical practice.

Indexed as

CommunicationHealthcare services researchPharmacy practicePrescription medication labels

Identifiers

PMID37214531
PMCPMC10194347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.