ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026
Protected learning time in community pharmacy and possibilities for upscaling: an exploratory study in Wales, UK.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The remit of pharmacists' vital role in the healthcare system is expanding, and continuous professional development (CPD) of pharmacists is critical. While CPD is mandatory in the UK, a lack of protected learning time (PLT) hinders engagement, particularly in community pharmacies. In Wales, UK, a national PLT programme was piloted to address this, involving funding for 12-15 days of PLT for community pharmacists. This study investigated whether PLT provision can benefit both community pharmacists and their pharmacy, and explored opportunities for upscaling PLT provision. Method: A realist qualitative approach was adopted across four phases. Community pharmacists participating in the PLT programme submitted monthly diary entries and engaged in one-off group and individual interviews. Employer perspectives were collected via an online survey. Education and Training Leads reflected on preliminary findings and their comments were captured via group interview. Data were coded and analysed thematically through a constant comparative approach. Results: Thirty participants contributed data, including 96 diary entries from 20 pharmacists, interviews with 15 pharmacists, survey responses from 12 employers, and input from 3 education leads. The PLT promoted both individual professional development and organisational capacity, and also enhanced pharmacists' personal wellbeing. Nonetheless, challenges for employers were prevalent, including rising costs of locum cover and service disruptions. Participants proposed two scalable PLT models: pre-scheduled PLT slots and non-patient-facing hours. Conclusion: PLT improves pharmacist professional development and personal wellbeing and enables broader service provision in their pharmacy. However, upscaling of PLT requires addressing financial and logistical barriers. Structured and equitable PLT models, such as routine closures or non-patient-facing hours, warrant further research and piloting to assess feasibility, acceptability and impact both for pharmacists and patient care.
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.