ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Pharmacists' views on potential non-medical prescribing for pharmacists in Sweden: a nationwide survey study.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe role of pharmacists in healthcare has evolved, and in several countries, they have prescribing rights. Currently, pharmacists in Sweden do not have the right to prescribe. Exploring their views on pharmacist prescribing may be a critical step toward advancing the profession and improving patient care.
aimTo explore pharmacists' views on potential pharmacist prescribing in Sweden.
methodAn online questionnaire about pharmacist prescribing was distributed via email to Swedish pharmacists who are members of the Swedish Pharmacists Association (n = 5597). The questionnaire covered demographic information and statements about predefined prescribing models, preconditions, benefits, and risks associated with pharmacist prescribing. Each statement had a 4-point agreement Likert scale response option with additional "Don´t know/no opinion" option. Data were collected in May 2024. Closed-ended questions were analyzed descriptively, while open-ended questions were categorized and summarized.
resultsOf the 395 respondents (7% response rate), 75.2% (n = 297) agreed with introducing at least one model of pharmacist prescribing. The two models that received the most support were "Prescribing based on an agreement or collaboration with one or more independent prescribers" (50.1%; n = 198) and "Independent, but limited prescribing rights" (48.1%; n = 190). All predefined preconditions were important for the respondents; their education (97.2%, n = 384) was identified as the most important factor. Overall, respondents agreed more with the benefits than the risks of introducing pharmacist prescribing. Most frequently (somewhat) agreeing that an enhanced professional position of pharmacists in health care was a key benefit (91.1%; n = 369), and the risks that respondents most (somewhat) agreed with included increased workload (80.8%; n = 319) and the conflict of interest involved in pharmacists acting as both prescribers and dispensers (60.8%; n = 240).
conclusionThe majority of respondents supported introducing at least one pharmacist prescribing model in Sweden. These findings provide valuable insights for policymakers considering an expanded role for pharmacists in Sweden, which may include a variety of extended professional roles in different settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.