ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2026
Pharmacists' recognition, support strategies, and perceived challenges in caring for patients with limited medication literacy in Saudi Arabia: A quasi-experimental study.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Medication literacy is critical for safe and effective medication use; however, evidence indicates that many individuals in Saudi Arabia struggle to understand medication-related information. Pharmacists are well positioned to identify literacy needs and provide appropriate counselling, yet limited data exist on their current practices and the effect of targeted training. This study aimed to assess pharmacists' understanding of medication literacy, their approaches to supporting patients with limited literacy, and the impact of a brief educational intervention on self-reported practices. Methods: A pre-post quasi-experimental design was employed. Pharmacists across Saudi Arabia were recruited using convenience and snowball sampling. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire assessing their understanding of medication literacy, assessment methods, counselling strategies, and perceived barriers. A 10-min educational video was then delivered, followed by a post-intervention questionnaire one month later. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used for analysis. Results: In total, 318 pharmacists completed the pre-intervention questionnaire, and 68 completed the follow-up. At baseline, 95.6% reported understanding medication literacy, but only 21.4% used standardized assessment tools. Common strategies included using simple language and prioritizing essential information (84.3%), teach-back methods (70.4%), and providing easy-to-read materials (58.8%). Post-intervention, 98.5% reported understanding medication literacy, and 82.4% reported assessing patients' literacy needs. Most participants indicated improved assessment (97.1%) and more tailored counselling practices (92.6%), and 92.6% found the module helpful. Major barriers included time constraints (82.1%), lack of incentives (24.8%), heavy workload (23%), and insufficient training. However, the substantial decline in participant numbers between the pre- and post-intervention samples may limit internal validity and the generalizability of post-intervention findings. Conclusion: Brief targeted training may support improvements in pharmacists' literacy-sensitive practices. Broader implementation of standardized assessment tools, enhanced professional education, and system-level support are needed to strengthen medication safety and patient understanding.
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.