Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40577331›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2025

Patient participant, healthcare professional, and stakeholder perspectives on the Pharmacy Homeless Outreach Engagement Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx) community pharmacy pilot randomised controlled trial.

Hannah Scobie, Shona MacKinnon, Karen Wood, Alessio Albanese, Yvonne Cunningham, Andrea Williamson, Jane Moir, Andrew McPherson, Cian Lombard, Steven Ross and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

15 authors.

Hannah ScobieGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0001-9082-3913
Shona MacKinnonGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Karen WoodGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Alessio AlbaneseGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Yvonne CunninghamGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Andrea WilliamsonGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
Jane MoirNHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland.
Andrew McPhersonNHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland.ORCID 0000-0001-9961-2338
Cian LombardNHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland.
Steven RossSimon Community Scotland, Scotland.
Adnan ArafBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, England.
Helena HeathBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, England.
Richard LowrieCentre for Homelessness and Inclusion Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Vibhu PaudyalFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, England.
Frances MairGeneral Practice & Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople experiencing homelessness (PEH) face complex health and social care needs, contributing to poor health outcomes and premature mortality. The Pharmacy Homeless Outreach Engagement Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx) intervention was developed to address these challenges through assertive outreach by NHS pharmacist independent prescribers working with third sector homelessness charity workers for PEH presenting to community pharmacy. This qualitative study aims to explore participant, healthcare professional, and stakeholder perceptions of the PHOENIx intervention and acceptability of trial procedures.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with trial participants, internal stakeholders (healthcare professionals/researchers), and external stakeholders (national and local) across two intervention sites (Glasgow and Birmingham) between March 2023 and February 2024. Data was analysed thematically using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) as a conceptual framework.

resultsParticipants (n = 26; usual care n = 7; intervention n = 19) viewed PHOENIx as distinctively comprehensive, consistent, and caring, valuing its holistic approach and the trusting relationships developed with the team. Stakeholders (n = 16; internal n = 5; external n = 11) recognised PHOENIx's potential to fill gaps in current service provision for PEH, appreciating its flexible, outreach-based model. Challenges identified included resource constraints, integration with existing services, and concerns about long-term sustainability.

conclusionsThe PHOENIx intervention shows promise in providing accessible, comprehensive healthcare which was acceptable to PEH. Its success in engaging this underserved population offers valuable lessons for service development. However, addressing challenges around resources, scalability, and sustainability will be important considerations for a future trial and wider implementation and expansion.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesHealth PersonnelIll-Housed PersonsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPharmaciesPharmacistsPilot ProjectsQualitative ResearchStakeholder Participation

Identifiers

PMID40577331
PMCPMC12204468

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.