ArticleBMJ open2025
Practices and knowledge of community pharmacists towards the use of proton pump inhibitors: a cross-sectional study in Jordan.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence tool utilization in deprescribing practices among community pharmacists in Jordan: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Community Pharmacists Regarding Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) Use: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cultural and systemic determinants of medication adherence management: mixed-methods evidence from Jordanian healthcare professionals.Frontiers in public health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe widespread use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) raised concerns on the safety of long-term use of these drugs. Community pharmacists have great responsibility of educating patients on these drugs which requires having adequate knowledge. The aim of this study was to assess the practices and knowledge of community pharmacists regarding PPIs.
designThis was a cross-sectional study conducted by filling in a questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed after a comprehensive literature review and assessed knowledge and practices. SETTINGS: Community pharmacists with at least 1 year of experience working in a community pharmacy were enrolled in the study.
participantsCommunity pharmacists with at least 1 year of experience working in a community pharmacy were enrolled in the study. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The knowledge, attitudes, and practices of community pharmacists towards PPIs dispensing.
resultsA total of 459 community pharmacists were approached for participation in the study, 451 (98.3%) community pharmacists agreed to be enrolled. The most dispensed PPIs in Jordan were lansoprazole and the most commonly treated medical condition with PPIs was gastric ulcer. PPIs were dispensed by the pharmacists very frequently and one-fourth of the participants did not review instructions with patients to ensure their proper use of PPIs. Participants had an average knowledge of 6.1±1.7 (the highest knowledge score is 12). More than one-third of participants (180, 39.9%) had inadequate knowledge (a score of less than 6). Being a PharmD graduate was the only significant factor that predicted adequate knowledge in the logistic regression model, with an adjusted OR of 5.671, p=0.002.
conclusionTo provide adequate pharmaceutical care services, community pharmacists must possess appropriate knowledge on different aspects of PPIs concerning administration, efficacy and long-term and short-term side effects.
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.