Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38983662›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of methodology2024

Simulated patient methodology as a "gold standard" in community pharmacy practice: Response to criticism.

Christian Kunow, Bernhard Langer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

2 authors.

Christian KunowDepartment of Health, Nursing, Management, Neubrandenburg University of Applied Sciences, Neubrandenburg 17033, Germany.
Bernhard LangerDepartment of Health, Nursing, Management, Neubrandenburg University of Applied Sciences, Neubrandenburg 17033, Germany. langer@hs-nb.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The simulated patient methodology (SPM) is considered the "gold standard" as covert participatory observation. SPM is attracting increasing interest for the investigation of community pharmacy practice; however, there is criticism that SPM can only show a small picture of everyday pharmacy practice and therefore has limited external validity. On the one hand, a certain design and application of the SPM goes hand in hand with an increase in external validity. Even if, on the other hand, this occurs at the expense of internal validity due to the trade-off situation, the justified criticism of the SPM for investigating community pharmacy practice can be countered.

Indexed as

Community pharmacyCovert participatory observationExternal validityGold standardInternal validitySimulated patient methodology

Identifiers

PMID38983662
PMCPMC11229873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.