Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9972524›Full record

ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS1998

Teaching and counselling behaviour: an applied study with community pharmacists.

L Leemans, G Laekman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L LeemansDivision of Drug and Patient Information, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium.
G Laekman
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuing education aims at improving practice. In this article, three main research questions are addressed: Which methodology is optimal to improve counselling behaviour? Are learning outcomes influenced by learning style? Does knowing imply doing? Four educational methods, transferring information on cough medicines, are assessed: a lecture, an interactive workshop, an audiocassette and a textbook. Attendants of the first three methods also received the textbook. Pharmacists completed a learning-style inventory in addition to a pretest. After the instruction phase, they were interviewed by telephone (post-test). We also evaluated the counseling behaviour by an 'incognito' visit to participants as well as to controls. Seventy-eight pharmacists participated. Their learning-style cannot be related to the results of pre- or posttest. Each educational method improved the level of knowledge significantly, but none of them proved to be better than the others. The pharmacists who in addition read the textbook, acquired more knowledge than those who did not. Self-study at home led to more fundamental rather than practical knowledge. Improving knowledge does not result in better counselling: 75% of the pharmacists asked only one question, especially concerning the type of cough. However 9 out of 10 mentioned how to use the drug. About half of the pharmacists told the patient about the action of the medicine. Other items were hardly ever mentioned. There was no difference in counselling behaviour between the intervention group and a group of pharmacists who did not attend the course. This investigation does not reveal any particular method of in-service training as being more efficient. Active use of self-study materials helps to improve pharmacological knowledge. Implementing educational strategies to improve counselling behaviour remains a future aim.

Indexed as

BelgiumCounselingData CollectionEducation, PharmacyHumansPatient Education as TopicPharmacies

Identifiers

PMID9972524
OpenAlexW142975985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.