ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2023
Assessing consumers' perception and demand on the community pharmacists' dispensing.
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. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess the general public's perception of services provided by community pharmacies, their willingness to utilize these services, their satisfaction with and understanding of community pharmacists, and their views on dispensing separation and pharmacy medicines (P medicines).
methodsAn online cross-sectional study was conducted, in which questionnaires were distributed among the general public. A novel questionnaire was designed and validated specifically for this study. It was composed of six sections: demographics, pharmacy usage and service preferences, understanding and satisfaction with pharmacists, views on dispensing separation, private community pharmacies, and knowledge of P medicines. Statistical analyses such as one-way ANOVA, independent t test, and binary logistic regression were employed, with a p value of < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
resultsThe study received 222 responses. The majority of the respondents were females within the 20-29-year-old age group (62.2%). Most respondents preferred to consult doctors for medical treatment, with their primary reason for visiting community pharmacies being to collect prescribed medicines. About 52.7% of respondents expressed their willingness to avail of screening services and treatment for minor illnesses at community pharmacies. A statistically significant difference was found among different age groups regarding their views on the dispensing separation system, with those aged 41-50 years demonstrating higher scores. However, the binary logistic regression analysis did not reveal any statistical significance when comparing the understanding of P medicines among respondents.
conclusionsIn general, the public prefers to consult doctors for medical treatment and visit community pharmacies predominantly to collect prescriptions or purchase over-the-counter medications. Nonetheless, they are also open to utilizing services provided by community pharmacists, particularly screening services and treatment for minor illnesses.
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.