@article {214, title = {Perception of Pharmacists about Scientific Publications in Saudi Arabia}, journal = {PTB Reports}, volume = {8}, year = {2022}, month = {April 2022}, pages = {01-11}, type = {Research Article}, chapter = {01}, abstract = {

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to explore the perception of pharmacists about scientific publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted to explore the perception of pharmacists about scientific publications in Saudi Arabia. We used a selfreported electronic survey questionnaire and distributed it to interns to consultants, and pharmacy specialists in Saudi Arabia. The survey collected demographic information of the responders, their perception of scientific publications, and barriers preventing them from participating in pharmacy scientific publications. In addition, we requested their suggestions on how to stimulate their interest in pharmacy publications. We used 5-point Likert response scale system with close-ended questions to obtain responses. The data were collected through the Survey Monkey system and analyzed with the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), Jeffery{\textquoteright}s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), and Microsoft Excel (version 16) software. Results: The average score for the perception of pharmacists about scientific publications was 3.74. The highest score (3.33) was obtained for the element {\textquotedblleft}the pharmacist understands the pharmacy publication and pharmacy publications terminology.{\textquotedblright} The score for the element {\textquotedblleft}pharmacist believes that pharmacy publications are essential for the pharmacist{\textquotedblright} was (3.97). According to our results, the pharmacists are interested in working on a pharmacy publications project. The average score for the barriers that prevent pharmacists from participating in pharmacy scientific publication was (3.76). The high score for the element {\textquotedblleft}the pharmacist believes that the daily activities prevent me from doing pharmacy publication as there is lack of interest and motivation{\textquotedblright} was 3.88. The score for the element {\textquotedblleft}pharmacist considers that pharmacy publications are essential for the pharmacist{\textquotedblright} was (3.85). The average score for the element {\textquotedblleft}suggestions to stimulate interest in pharmacy publications{\textquotedblright} was (3.40). The highest score was obtained for the element {\textquotedblleft}the pharmacist believes that teaching undergraduate students about pharmacy publications should be an integral part of the practice{\textquotedblright} was (3.68). The score for {\textquotedblleft}creating awareness about pharmacy practice-based pharmacy publications and benefits to practice{\textquotedblright} was (3.58). The score for the single-test reliability analysis of McDonald{\textquoteright}s ω was (0.905), Cronbach{\textquoteright}s α was (0.908), Gutmann{\textquoteright}s λ2 was (0.923), Gutmann{\textquoteright}s λ6 was (0.981), and greater lower bound was (0.993). Conclusion: The perception of pharmacists about scientific publication was found to be inadequate to fair. Therefore, removing the obstacles such as high workload and encouraging pharmacy staff to publish should improve the perception of performance publications in Saudi Arabia.

}, keywords = {Perception, Pharmacists, Publications Saudi Arabia, Scientific}, doi = {10.5530/PTB.2022.8.1}, author = {Yousef Ahmed Alomi and Sultan Mohammed Al-Jarallah and Juman saad Mohammad Alsaab and Razan Alshehri and Khawla Ibrahim Al-shahrani} } @article {215, title = {The Practice of Scientific Publications by Pharmacists in Saudi Arabia}, journal = {PTB Reports}, volume = {8}, year = {2022}, month = {April 2022}, pages = {26-36}, type = {Research Article}, chapter = {26}, abstract = {

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to assess the practice of scientific publications by pharmacists in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey study, we aimed to assess the practice of scientific publications by pharmacists in Saudi Arabia. We used a self-reported electronic survey questionnaire and distributed it to pharmacists from interns to consultants and specialists in Saudi Arabia. The survey collected demographic information and information about the type of publications made by them, the selected elements used during scientific publications, and the social media platforms where they distribute your publication. We used a 5-point Likert response scale system with close-ended questions to obtain responses. The data were collected through the Survey Monkey system and analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), Jeffery{\textquoteright}s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), and Microsoft Excel software (version 16). Results: A total of 543 pharmacists responded to the questionnaire. Of them, more than one-quarter were from the central region (5 (28.55\%)) followed by the eastern region (133 (24.49\%)), with statistically significant differences between regions (p=0.000). Females responded (321 (59.12\%)) more than males (222 (40.88\%)). Based on nationality, Saudi nationals (351 (64.64\%)) responded more than non-Saudi nationals (192 (35.36\%)), with statistically significant differences between them (p=0.000). The average score for type of journal for scientific publications was 3.99 with high scores obtained {\textquotedblleft}article in the international scientific journal{\textquotedblright} (4.26) and {\textquotedblleft}article in the local scientific journal{\textquotedblright} (4.22), with statistically significant difference between responses (p=0.000). The average score of pharmacist practice of unique elements during scientific publications was 3.81, with high scores obtained for the element {\textquotedblleft}are your colleague{\textquoteright}s reviewers{\textquotedblright} (4.10) and {\textquotedblleft}spelling and grammar checker through special software{\textquotedblright} (3.95). The average score for the {\textquotedblleft}type of social media platforms to distribute your scientific publications{\textquotedblright} was 3.33, with high scores obtained for WhatsApp (3.73) and YouTube (3.56). The scores for the single-test reliability analysis of McDonald{\textquoteright}s ω was 0.939, Cronbach{\textquoteright}s α was 0.935, Gutmann{\textquoteright}s λ2 was 0.942, Gutmann{\textquoteright}s λ6 was 0.976, and greater lower bound was 0.990. Conclusion: The practice of scientific publication by pharmacists was found to be fair in Saudi Arabia. An annual report about pharmacists involved in the scientific publication is suggested. We recommend improving the practice of scientific publications by pharmacists in Saudi Arabia.

}, keywords = {Pharmacist, Practice, Publications, Saudi Arabia, Scientific}, doi = {10.5530/PTB.2022.8.4}, author = {Yousef Ahmed Alomi and Sultan Mohammed Al-Jarallah and Juman saad Mohammad Alsaab and Razan Alshehri and Khawla Ibrahim Al-shahrani} } @article {190, title = {Analysis of Practice of Drug Information Resources by Dentists in Saudi Arabia}, journal = {PTB Reports}, volume = {7}, year = {2021}, month = {April 2021}, pages = {28-34}, type = {Research Article}, chapter = {28}, abstract = {

Aim: This study{\textquoteright}s objective was to analyze dentists{\textquoteright} practice of drug information resources in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a 4-month cross-sectional study about the dentists{\textquoteright} practice of drug information resources in Saudi Arabia. It is a self-reported and electronic survey of dentists. We included dentists from interns to consultants and from all specialties in dentistry and located in Saudi Arabia. The survey consisted of two parts. The first part collected demographic information. The second part collected data about the type of drug information inquiries, aspects of dental drug information resources, and the dental drug information resources and types of dental drug information resources used in practice are responsible. We used the 5-point Likert response scale system to obtain responses to the survey questions. The data were collected through the Survey Monkey system and analyzed through the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS), Jeffery{\textquoteright}s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), and Microsoft Excel (version 16). Results: The average number of dental information resources was 0.84 per patient daily. The most commonly referred resource in relation to the dental drug information was biweekly (94 (36.43\%)), monthly (92 (35.66\%)) followed by weekly (35 (13.58\%)) newsletter in addition to those published a few times per year (18 (6.98\%)). The most frequently searched question was about the adverse reaction (190 (73.36\%)) and drug availability (144 (55.60\%)), whereas the majority of the dental prescriptions was related to the oral ulcer (83 (32.05\%)) and sedation medications (74 (28.57\%)). The average score for the item {\textquotedblleft}implemented items for dental drug information resources{\textquotedblright} was 1.78. The highest score was obtained for the element {\textquotedblleft}an annual plan of dental drug information resources{\textquotedblright} (1.88). In contrast, the lowest score was obtained for {\textquotedblleft}dental drug information resources dentist{\textquoteright}s competency{\textquotedblright} (1.7), with statistically significant differences between all responses (p\<0.001). The highest scores of dental drug information resources (to authorities) the responsibility was a clinical pharmacist (4.65) and pharmacy technicians (4.34). In contrast, the lowest score was dentists (2.19), with statistical signification among all answers in each aspect (p\<0.001). Conclusion: Despite the demand for resources to resolve drug-related dental care problems, the resources were seldom utilized. Targeting education and training of dental information resources is required to improve dental patient care in Saudi Arabia.

}, keywords = {Analysis, Dentist, Drug Information, Practice, Resources, Saudi Arabia}, doi = {10.5530/PTB.2021.7.6}, author = {Yousef Ahmed Alomi and Anwar Mouslim Alshammari and Juman saad Mohammad Alsaab} } @article {211, title = {Knowledge of Pharmacists about Scientific Publications in Saudi Arabia}, journal = {PTB Reports}, volume = {7}, year = {2021}, month = {December 2021}, pages = {115-125}, type = {Research Article}, chapter = {115}, abstract = {

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to assess pharmacists{\textquoteright} knowledge about scientific publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, we analyzed pharmacists{\textquoteright} knowledge about scientific publications in Saudi Arabia. We used a self-reported electronic survey questionnaire and distributed it to pharmacists from interns to consultants and specialists. The survey collected demographic information of the responders and their knowledge of selected research paper elements in a scientific journal. We used 5-point Likert response scale system with closeended questions to obtain responses. The data were collected through the Survey Monkey system and analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) and Jeffery{\textquoteright}s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), and Microsoft Excel (version 16) software. Results: A total of 543 pharmacists responded to the questionnaire. Of them, more than one-quarter of the participants responded from the central region (155 (28.55\%)), followed by the eastern region (133 (24.49\%)), with statistically significant differences between all regions (p=0.000). Females responded more (321 (59.12\%)) than that of males (222 (40.88\%)). The majority of the responders were Saudi nationals (351 (64.64\%)), followed by non-Saudi nationals (192 (35.36\%)), with statistically significant differences between them (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about writing a section in the research article was 4.07, with high scores obtained for the elements {\textquotedblleft}knowledge of the abstract section{\textquotedblright} (4.51) and {\textquotedblleft}knowledge of the Introduction section{\textquotedblright} (4.47), with statistically significant between all responses (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about various study designs in the manuscript was 3.36, with high scores obtained for the elementary knowledge of cohort study (3.59), case series (3.59), observational study, and Letters to the editor (3.49), with statistically significant differences between responses (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about journal indexing database was (3.17), with high scores obtained for the elementary knowledge of the Google Scholar (3.78), PubMed (3.60), and Index Medicus (3.43). The scores for the reliability analysis of McDonald{\textquoteright}s ω was (0.843), Cronbach{\textquoteright}s α was (0.847), Gutmann{\textquoteright}s λ2 was (0.888), Gutmann{\textquoteright}s was λ6 (0.985), and Greater Lower Bound was (0.994). Conclusion: Pharmacists{\textquoteright} knowledge about writing research sections, study design, and journal indexing database for scientific publications in Saudi Arabia was varied. Therefore, we highly recommend improving pharmacists{\textquoteright} training and education during graduation to improve patients{\textquoteright} pharmaceutical care in Saudi Arabia.

}, keywords = {Knowledge, Pharmacist, Saudi Arabia., Scientific Publications}, doi = {10.5530/PTB.2021.7.19}, author = {Yousef Ahmed Alomi and Sultan Mohammed Al-Jarallah and Juman saad Mohammad Alsaab and Razan Alshehri and Khawla Ibrahim Al-shahrani} }