Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40080019›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Vulnerability Index Approach to Identify Pharmacy Deserts and Keystone Pharmacies.

Walter S Mathis, Lucas A Berenbrok, Peter A Kahn, Giovanni Appolon, Shangbin Tang, Inmaculada Hernandez

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Error in Author Affiliation.JAMA network open · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Walter S MathisDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Lucas A BerenbrokDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Peter A KahnSection of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Giovanni AppolonHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Shangbin TangDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Inmaculada HernandezDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Community pharmacies are crucial for public health, providing essential services such as medication dispensing, vaccinations, and point-of-care testing. Addressing disparities in pharmacy access, particularly in underserved rural and low-income areas, is critical for health equity. Objective: To identify areas in the US at risk of becoming pharmacy deserts through the development of a novel pharmacy vulnerability index. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study in the contiguous 48 states performed geographic information systems analysis of pharmacy data from the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs (NCPDP) dataQ. Participants included all open-door pharmacies (community or retail pharmacies open to the general public without restrictions on who can access its services) in the US as of February 2024. Statistical analysis was performed from July to August 2024. Exposure: The primary exposure was travel time to pharmacies across the US. Main Outcomes and Measures: A pharmacy desert was defined as a census tract where the travel time to the nearest pharmacy exceeds the supermarket access time for that region and urbanicity level. Building on this definition, a pharmacy vulnerability index was developed, which indicates the number of pharmacies that would need to close for a census tract to become a pharmacy desert. Tracts with a pharmacy vulnerability index of 1, depending solely on a single pharmacy for access, were identified as at risk of becoming deserts. Subpopulation totals and percentages living in pharmacy deserts or relying on keystone pharmacies were computed, and then stratified by urbanicity and race. Results: Among 321.3 million individuals (39.7 million [12.3%] Black, 59.0 million [18.2%] Hispanic, 195.0 million [60.3%] White) in the contiguous US, 57.1 million (17.7%) were identified as living in pharmacy deserts, with 28.9 million (8.9%) additionally relying on a single pharmacy for access. Small rural areas were particularly affected, with a higher dependency on single pharmacies (4.1 million individuals [14.3%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of pharmacy access in the US, significant disparities in pharmacy access were identified, especially pronounced in small rural areas. Targeted policy interventions, such as incremental reimbursement rates or other monetary incentives, are needed to ensure the financial sustainability of pharmacies that serve as the sole source of pharmacy services in at-risk areas.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesHealth Services AccessibilityPharmaciesCross-Sectional StudiesHumansUnited StatesVulnerable Populations

Identifiers

PMID40080019
PMCPMC11907307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.