Pharmacists’ acceptability of provision of sexually transmitted infection services: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pharmacists are taking on more roles in helping to close the gap in care for sexually transmitted infection (STI) management services. The acceptability of pharmacists to perform these services is not yet well understood. The objective of this review was to map, characterize, and explicate the acceptability of pharmacist-delivered STI services. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL) were searched up to July 2024 for articles relating to the acceptability of pharmacists to independently assess and manage issues relating to STIs. The results were then mapped to the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). KEY FINDINGS: A total of 2181 publications were identified. 22 studies met inclusion criteria and assessed at least one outcome aligning within the constructs of the TFA. Services relating to pre-exposure prophylaxis prescribing, point-of-care testing, chlamydia (and gonorrhea) testing and treatment, and human papillomavirus vaccine prescribing were identified. The overall acceptability of pharmacist-delivered STI services was high across the constructs of the TFA. CONCLUSIONS: This review outlines that the acceptability of pharmacists to provide STI management is high and pharmacists are willing to take on accountability for these services. Pharmacists believe that they have a moral obligation to improve the health and wellbeing of their patients, while, decreasing the burden on the broader health care system.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".