Assessing the Quality of Database Search Strategies Utilized by Meta-analyses That Evaluate Infectious Disease Drug Therapy
1
Citation
17
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Summer camp
Cite
Citations (12)
Pharmacy school
Work experience
Cite
Citations (10)
Subgroup analysis
Cite
Citations (21)
Comparison of search strategies in systematic reviews of adverse effects to other systematic reviews
Abstract Background Research indicates that the methods used to identify data for systematic reviews of adverse effects may need to differ from other systematic reviews. Objectives To compare search methods in systematic reviews of adverse effects with other reviews. Methods The search methodologies in 849 systematic reviews of adverse effects were compared with other reviews. Results Poor reporting of search strategies is apparent in both systematic reviews of adverse effects and other types of systematic reviews. Systematic reviews of adverse effects are less likely to restrict their searches to MEDLINE or include only randomised controlled trials ( RCT s). The use of other databases is largely dependent on the topic area and the year the review was conducted, with more databases searched in more recent reviews. Adverse effects search terms are used by 72% of reviews and despite recommendations only two reviews report using floating subheadings. Conclusions The poor reporting of search strategies in systematic reviews is universal, as is the dominance of searching MEDLINE . However, reviews of adverse effects are more likely to include a range of study designs (not just RCT s) and search beyond MEDLINE .
Cite
Citations (51)
Cite
Citations (0)
Background: In the United Kingdom (UK), pharmacy student numbers are increasing as the number of pharmacy schools increases. This is likely to have a negative impact on employment opportunities at a time when new entrants to UK pharmacy schools are paying dramatically increased tuition fees. Moreover, proposed changes to the Master of Pharmacy (MPham) programme, with pre-registration training integrated into undergraduate education has profound implications for the future student experience. Aims: To identify the main factors which influenced the decision of current students at one UK school of pharmacy to study pharmacy, and those factors which would have impacted on that decision if faced with pay tuition fees of £9,000 ($14,700). Also, the study aimed to gather students’ opinions on the impact of increased fees on the number of pharmacy applicants, and whether their preference is for a four-year MPharm course or a five-year integrated programme. Method: Questionnaires were distributed to pharmacy students of all four years at the School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), Preston, UK; in the academic year 2011/2012. Results: A response rate of 88.6% (n=133) to the questionnaires was achieved. The main factor influencing pharmacy students’ decision to study pharmacy was their interest in pharmacy, though they believed if they had to pay increased tuition fees, then the financial rewards of a pharmacy career would be most important. Fifty- seven percent (n=76) of the students felt the number of students applying for pharmacy would decrease as a result of the rise in the tuition fees, whilst 71% (n=95) preferred the current four + one MPharm course structure rather than the proposed five- year integrated course. Conclusion: Reasons for studying pharmacy were multi-factorial. However, with increased tuition fees, financial considerations were considered a greater motivator, potentially conflicting with the traditional core values of pharmacy, namely service- orientation and altruism. The proposed integrated five-year MPharm is not yet defined, but appeals less than the present structure to current students. Changes to the degree programmes and higher tuition fees may potentially impact negatively on future applications to study pharmacy.
Pharmacy school
Cite
Citations (4)
Cite
Citations (0)
self-medication involves the use of medicines without the input of health professionals. Available studies are not entirely conclusive on self-medication among health science versus non-health science university students. The current study therefore sought to investigate relevant aspects of self-medication among pharmacy and non-pharmacy students.this quantitative cross-sectional research was conducted among undergraduate pharmacy and non-pharmacy students of the University of Ghana from October 1st 2019 to December 6th 2019. Using a questionnaire, interviews were conducted to assess the pattern and attitude towards self-medication among respondents within the last 2 months.a total of 337 (163 pharmacy and 174 non-pharmacy) students filled and completed questionnaires. The prevalence of self-medication was 55.2% for pharmacy and 51.1% for non-pharmacy students. Both pharmacy and non-pharmacy students were either accepting or ambivalent towards self-medication. Painkillers were the major class of medications that were self-medicated by both pharmacy (38.5%) and non-pharmacy students (30.7%). The most common reason for self-medication among pharmacy (62.2%) and non-pharmacy (56.2%) students was the need for rapid relief from an illness. Majority of the participants who were self-medicated (27.6% among non-pharmacy and 36.8% among pharmacy students) demonstrated ambivalent attitude towards self-medication. An increase in the study level reduced the likelihood of self-medication in both pharmacy and non-pharmacy students: OR=0.442, CI = 0.266-0.736 for pharmacy students and OR=0.671, CI = 0.456-0.987 for non-pharmacy students.self-medication is common students of the University of Ghana. Prevalence of self-medication was higher among pharmacy students than non-pharmacy students. This study provides data for targeted education and sensitisation of self-medication among university students.
Self-medication
Cross-sectional study
Cite
Citations (5)
Abstract Background Results of new studies should be interpreted in the context of what is already known to compare results and build the state of the science. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify and synthesise results from meta-research studies examining if original studies within health use systematic reviews to place their results in the context of earlier, similar studies. Methods We searched MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), and the Cochrane Methodology Register for meta-research studies reporting the use of systematic reviews to place results of original clinical studies in the context of existing studies. The primary outcome was the percentage of original studies included in the meta-research studies using systematic reviews or meta-analyses placing new results in the context of existing studies. Two reviewers independently performed screening and data extraction. Data were synthesised using narrative synthesis and a random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate the mean proportion of original studies placing their results in the context of earlier studies. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. Results We included 15 meta-research studies, representing 1724 original studies. The mean percentage of original studies within these meta-research studies placing their results in the context of existing studies was 30.7% (95% CI [23.8%, 37.6%], I 2 =87.4%). Only one of the meta-research studies integrated results in a meta-analysis, while four integrated their results within a systematic review; the remaining cited or referred to a systematic review. The results of this systematic review are characterised by a high degree of heterogeneity and should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusion Our systematic review demonstrates a low rate of and great variability in using systematic reviews to place new results in the context of existing studies. On average, one third of the original studies contextualised their results. Improvement is still needed in researchers’ use of prior research systematically and transparently—also known as the use of an evidence-based research approach, to contribute to the accumulation of new evidence on which future studies should be based. Systematic review registration Open Science registration number https://osf.io/8gkzu/
Data extraction
Research Design
Cite
Citations (11)
(1) Background: Many factors may play a role in deciding to opt for pharmacy as a major. However, no previous studies have been conducted in Saudi Arabia to explore these factors. This study aims to identify the potential factors that prompted students to join the pharmacy program. (2) Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire was distributed among undergraduate pharmacy students in Saudi Arabia, addressing areas such as reasons that encourage them to choose pharmacy as a major, and students' socio-demographic characteristics. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the study variables, and a simple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the potential factors. (3) Results: A total of 491 students completed the questionnaire. Around 40% of them had chosen to study pharmacy as their first choice. Only gender, current GPA, and reasons related to the pharmacy field were found to have a statistically significant association with students selecting pharmacy as their first choice. (4) Conclusions: This study shows that pharmacy students have a future-oriented outlook and selected pharmacy as their first choice because it will develop them professionally, financially, and intellectually. Educating high school students about the characteristic of pharmacy would help attract more talented students to the pharmacy carrier.
Cross-sectional study
Pharmacy school
Cite
Citations (7)