ArticlePloS one2026
Quality of pharmacy services and adherence to good pharmacy practice at points of sale in Punjab, Pakistan: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adhering to good pharmacy practice (GPP) guidelines ensures the safe, effective, and ethical delivery of pharmaceutical services at community pharmacies, commonly referred to as Point of Sale (POS). However, developing countries such as Pakistan experience poor compliance with GPP. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of pharmacy services and adherence to GPP, focusing on technology compliance, infrastructure, legal aspects, dispensing practices, storage conditions, and other essential facilities. A descriptive cross-sectional study design was employed for the current study. The sample size was determined using the online sample size calculator RaosoftTM. The method adopted for the distribution of sample among selected cities was done by proportional sampling and the convenience sampling technique was employed for accessing individual POS. A self-designed questionnaire, consisting of five sections, i.e., i) demographic data, ii) prescription recording and data management system, iii) pharmacy infrastructure, facilities and services, iv) dispensing, preparation, administration and v) distribution of medicine and storage facilities was used to gather data from the selected POS of Punjab, Pakistan between 20th July 2024-20th September 2024. The data were entered and analysed using IBM SPSS 23.0. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to describe the results. A total of 598 POS were included in the final analysis. Approximately 90.6% were independent POS, with 72.7% operating in the A category. A qualified person (QP) was observed in only 29.1% of POS. Approximately 31.9% of POS did not have any computerized technology, 52.2% lacked a system for monitoring the facility's temperature, and a significant proportion (84.6%) were involved in prescribing for minor ailments. The mean score was higher in POS operating under category A licenses, chain setups and those with one or more QP. The highest significant (p < 0.05) mean difference observed between chain and independent POS was 3.53 (95% CI = 2.44, 4.64), between category A licensing type and no available license was 11.99 (95% CI = 8.13, 15.84), and between the presence and absence of a QP was 2.30 (95% CI = 1.58, 3.01). The findings revealed that the lack of adherence to GPP is a common practice in the country and is significantly linked to various factors such as POS type, type of license of POS, and availability and number of QP at the POS. To enhance compliance with GPP, the collaborative efforts of various stakeholders, along with targeted interventions, are essential.
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.