ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Development and evaluation of an e-learning program on drug-related problems for community pharmacists.
Article in International journal of clinical 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCommunity pharmacists (CPs) are pivotal in the management of drug-related problems (DRPs), yet a need for additional training has been recognized.
aimThe aim was to develop and evaluate an e-learning program to enhance pharmacists' ability to detect and manage DRPs.
methodThe e-learning program provided a self-paced learning experience with 10 modules, each focusing on a DRP. The DRPs were chosen as part of a previous Delphi consensus study. The development team, consisting of researchers, clinical pharmacists, and CPs, considered DRPs applicable if they occurred frequently and could be solved in a pharmacy. Moreover, a predefined checklist was established to guide the development of new modules and specify quality standards. Each module was structured into an educational phase (tutorials, pre- and post-knowledge quizzes, in-depth exercises), and a practical phase (documentation of anonymized patient encounters). After completing all modules, participants took a final comprehensive quiz with 2 questions per module (in total 20 questions). The program was evaluated on multiple levels: pharmacists' knowledge change, how they implemented this knowledge in practice, and their feedback. Data were analyzed descriptively. Comparison between the quizzes were calculated using the Wilcoxon test.
resultsA total of 203 pharmacists registered to participate in the study, with participation declining across modules (184 participants completed Module 1 pre-knowledge quiz vs. 119 in Module 10). Across all modules, a significant knowledge increase was observed when comparing pre- and post-knowledge-quizzes (p < 0.001). Knowledge levels remained high in the final quiz (on average 1.63 ± 0.61 correct answers). Participants documented 13,778 patient encounters, thereof 5073 encounters with at least one DRP. According to the participants, most of the DRPs (90.1%, n = 4550) could be resolved. A total of 1137 feedbacks were received. Overall, feedback was positive, with participants highlighting improved abilities to engage with patients (85.2%, n = 969) and to identify DRPs (82.0%, n = 629).
conclusionBy bridging the gap between theoretical learning and practical application, this e-learning program improves pharmacists' skills in DRP management.
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.