Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37789443›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2023

ChatGPT in pharmacy practice: a cross-sectional exploration of Jordanian pharmacists' perception, practice, and concerns.

Khawla Abu Hammour, Hamza Alhamad, Fahmi Y Al-Ashwal, Abdulsalam Halboup, Rana Abu Farha, Adnan Abu Hammour

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Khawla Abu HammourDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Biopharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Hamza AlhamadDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Zarqa University, Zarqa, Jordan.
Fahmi Y Al-AshwalDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Al-Ayen University, Thi-Qar, Iraq. fahmialashwal89@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2076-0771
Abdulsalam HalboupDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Science and Technology, Sana'a, Yemen.
Rana Abu FarhaClinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Applied Science Private University, P.O. Box 11937, Amman, Jordan.
Adnan Abu HammourMedrise Medical Center, Dubai Healthcare City, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study is to find out how much pharmacists know and have used ChatGPT in their practice. We investigated the advantages and disadvantages of utilizing ChatGPT in a pharmacy context, the amount of training necessary to use it proficiently, and the influence on patient care using a survey.

methodsThis cross-sectional study was carried out between May and June 2023 to assess the potential and problems that pharmacists observed while integrating chatbots powered by AI (ChatGPT) in pharmacy practice. The correlation between perceived benefits and concerns was evaluated using Spearman's rho correlation due to the data's non-normal distribution.Any pharmacists licensed by the Jordanian Pharmacists Association were included in the study. A convenient sampling technique was used to choose the participants, and the study questionnaire was distributed utilizing an online medium (Facebook and WhatsApp). Anyone who expressed interest in taking part was given a link to the study's instructions so they may read them before giving their electronic consent and accessing the survey.

resultsThe potential advantages of ChatGPT in the pharmacy practice were widely acknowledged by the participants. The majority of participants (69.9%) concurred that educational material about pharmacy items or therapeutic areas can be provided using ChatGPT, with 66.9% of respondents believing that ChatGPT is a machine learning algorithm. Concerns about the accuracy of AI-generated responses were also prevalent. More than half of the participants (55.7%) raised the possibility that AI systems such as ChatGPT could pick up on and replicate prejudices and discriminatory patterns from the data they were trained on. Analysis shows a statistically significant positive link, albeit a minor one, between the perceived advantages of ChatGPT and its drawbacks (r = 0.255, p < 0.001). However, concerns were strongly correlated with knowledge of ChatGPT. In contrast to those who were either unsure or had not heard of ChatGPT (64.2%), individuals who had heard of it were more likely to have strong concerns (79.8%) (p = 0.002). Finally, the results show a statistically significant association between the frequency of ChatGPT use and positive perceptions of the tool (p < 0.001).

conclusionsAlthough ChatGPT has shown promise in health and pharmaceutical practice, its application should be rigorously regulated by evidence-based law. According to the study's findings, pharmacists support the use of ChatGPT in pharmacy practice but have concerns about its use due to ethical reasons, legal problems, privacy concerns, worries about the accuracy of the data generated, data learning, and bias risk.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceChatGPTPharmacy practice

Identifiers

PMID37789443
PMCPMC10548710

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.