ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2024
Capturing pharmacists' perspectives on the value, risks, and applications of ChatGPT in pharmacy practice: A qualitative study.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare-A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Ethical concerns of AI in healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative studies.Nursing ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Integrating Large Language Models Into UAE Community Pharmacies: Pharmacists' Perspectives on Benefits, Concerns, and Implementation Barriers.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2026Article
- Perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence in Japan: a focus group interview study of healthcare providers.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Assessing Pharmacists' Use and Perception of AI Chatbots in Pharmacy Practice: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR medical education · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the pharmacists' perspectives on benefits and risks of using ChatGPT in pharmacy practice and explore how this disruptive and ground-breaking technology can be effectively integrated. Methods and materials: A qualitative approach that draws data from licensed pharmacists using semi-structured interviews. Results: Most participants felt ChatGPT could enhance the compliance, use, management, safety, adherence to medication, medication counseling, minimize medication errors, and streamline medication dispensing. However, when Chat-GPT has limited information and relies on obsolete medication databases, it risks providing inaccurate recommendations and inadequate medication details. Also, most participants highlighted the difficulty in interpreting ambiguous patient input or drug descriptions when using the application. Conclusions: Despite its potential, utilizing ChatGPT in pharmacy practice must be dependent on evidence-based results that offer profound insight into AI technology.
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.