ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences2024
Eye-tracking-based analysis of pharmacists' thought processes in the dispensing work: research related to the efficiency in dispensing based on right-brain thinking.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences, 2024. 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.
- Right-brain utilization in pharmacists' dispensing processes: an eye-tracking analysis of efficiency and safety using error-induction models.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmacists should be aware of their thought processes in dispensing work, including differences in the dispensing complexities owing to different drug positions in the left, center, and right areas. Dispensing errors associated with "same-name drugs (a pair of drugs with the same name but a different ingredient quantity)" are prevalent and often negatively affect patients. In this study, using five pairs of comparative models, the gaze movements of pharmacists in dispensing work were analyzed using an eye-tracking method to elucidate their thought processes.
methodsWe prepared verification slides and displayed them on a prescription monitor and three drug rack monitors. The dispensing information (drug name, drug usage, location display, and total amount) was displayed on a prescription monitor. A total of 180 drugs including five target drugs were displayed on the three drug rack monitors. Total gaze points in the prescription area, those in the drug rack area, total vertical movements between the two areas, and time required to dispense drugs were measured as the four classifications Gaze 1, Gaze 2, Passage, and Time, respectively. First, we defined the two types of location displays as "numeral combination" and "color/symbol combination." Next, we defined two pairs of models A
resultsSignificant differences in the complexities of dispensing work were observed in Gaze 2, Passage, and Time between the models A
conclusionsUsing the current dispensing rules, pharmacists are not good at dispensing drugs located in the right area. An effective measure for reducing the dispensing complexity is to introduce visual information in the prescription content; the utilization of the right brain facilitates reducing the complexity in the right dispensing area.
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.