ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2024
Survey of community pharmacists' opinions on drug scheduling in Ontario and Québec.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Empowering Pharmacists in Heartburn Management: Practical Insights for OTC Treatment and Self-Care.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Treatment of Heartburn: A Survey of Ontario and Québec Community Pharmacists.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over the past decade, Canada has witnessed a shift of several drugs from prescription-only to behind-the-counter (BTC) and over-the-counter (OTC) status. This work examined community pharmacists' agreement with the current scheduling of agents used in the management of allergic rhinitis, heartburn, and vulvovaginitis. Methods: From September to October 2022, an online survey was administered to pharmacists practicing in in Ontario and Québec. The survey aimed to gather insights into their preferred scheduling for 15 medicines commonly used to manage the three selected conditions. Pharmacists were asked whether they agreed with the current scheduling status of each and, if not, how they feel it should be scheduled. Results: 715 pharmacists completed the survey, 462 from Ontario and 253 from Québec. Most were staff pharmacists working 30 or more hours per week, having been a pharmacist for 1-10 years. Ontario pharmacists expressed a preference for scheduling change for five drugs (four prescription [terconazole for intravaginal use, famotidine, rupatadine, mometasone nasal spray] and one unscheduled [ranitidine 75 mg]), while Québec pharmacists expressed preference for scheduling change for three prescription drugs (terconazole for intravaginal use, famotidine, rupatadine). Discussion: As pharmacy practice continues to evolve, pharmacists' comfort with initiating previously prescription-only therapy independently or assisting patients with self-selection may similarly evolve. Of the five drugs identified as having a discrepancy between current status and pharmacist preference, four are prescription and may be candidates to consider for prescription to OTC switch. Conclusion: Pharmacists in Ontario and Québec have expressed preference for most products used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, heartburn, and vulvovaginitis to be categorised as Schedule II (BTC) or Schedule III (OTC) available only in pharmacies.
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.