ArticleHealth science reports2026
Exploring Research Capacity and Engagement Drivers Among Hospital Pharmacy Professionals: A Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of textual responses to explore barriers, enablers, and motivators for cultivating research capacity: a statewide study of hospital pharmacy staff.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Healthcare research is an essential driver of evidence-based practice, leading to improved service delivery and outcomes. Despite being integral to pharmacy (e.g., in driving safe and effective use of medicines), research engagement is relatively low. This service evaluation study aimed to assess pharmacy professionals' research engagement inclusive of capacity (opportunity and time) and ability (skills and knowledge), and to explore potential barriers and facilitators to research engagement. Methods: The study was conducted at a single Mental Health and Community Trust in the UK between February and June in 2024. Data were collected in two phases: phase 1: an online survey assessed current research engagement, and phase 2: virtual individual interviews and a focus group explored in-depth views on research engagement. All practising pharmacists and pharmacy technicians were eligible to participate and were invited via email through a senior pharmacist. Quantitative data were descriptively analysed, and qualitative data were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. As a service evaluation, no ethical approval was required. Results: Of the 62 invited pharmacy professionals, 32 responded (52%, Conclusion: Overall, positive views on research were reflected. Current research involvement rate is low, as is the confidence in applying research to practice. Several barriers were identified, which require addressing to enhance research activity. Organisations therefore should assess research capacity and ability of their staff to identify encountered barriers to enhance research engagement.
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.