Assessment of Jordanian community pharmacists’ confidence to provide health services and advice on self-medication for women during pregnancy and breastfeeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe the services provided by community pharmacists and their confidence in providing advice on self-medication for women during pregnancy and breastfeeding. METHODS: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was distributed online to community pharmacists across Jordan in the period from August through December 2020. The questionnaire identified the services most frequently offered to women throughout pregnancy or breastfeeding and evaluated the community pharmacists' confidence in providing advice on self-medication and other services for this population group. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 340 community pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Most of them were female (89.4%), and just over half (55%) had less than 5 years of experience. The services offered by community pharmacists to women throughout pregnancy were dispensing medicine (49.1%), and dispensing herbal products (48.5%), whereas the services mainly provided for women during breastfeeding were providing advice on contraception (71.5%), and dispensing medication (45.3%).The most frequent complaints reported by women during pregnancy were gastrointestinal and urinary symptoms, and for women during lactation low milk supply and contraception. Regarding pharmacists' confidence in providing advice on self-medication, nearly half of the respondents (50% and 49.7%) reported that they had confidence in solving medication and health challenges during pregnancy and breastfeeding, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although community pharmacists provided different services for women who were pregnant or breastfeeding, many did not feel confident handling them. Continuous training programs are required to enhance community pharmacists' ability to provide adequate care for women during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".