Evidano is an AI-powered qualitative data analysis platform that helps researchers analyze interviews, open-ended surveys, and documents. According to the PLOS One scoping review (Kambayashi et al., 2026), veterinarian–pharmacist collaboration is described in a small, regionally varied literature base and is dominated by compounding and dispensing roles. This post is written for qualitative researchers, veterinary clinical teams, and pharmacy educators who need a reproducible method to extract themes, quantify role frequencies, and map barriers from mixed study types, with practical AI-enabled workflows described below.
Key Takeaways
According to the PLOS One scoping review (Kambayashi et al., 2026), the literature on veterinarian–pharmacist collaboration is limited but growing: the authors retrieved 239 records and included 16 studies published between 2007 and 2024. According to the PLOS One scoping review (Kambayashi et al., 2026), pharmacists most frequently performed compounding and dispensing, reported in 10 of the 16 studies (62.5%).
- 239 records were retrieved and screened, and 16 studies met inclusion criteria, according to PLOS One (searches through 30 August 2025).
- 10 of 16 included studies (62.5%) described pharmacist compounding and dispensing, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
- The review was published on July 31, 2026 in PLOS One and concluded that "Pharmacists are expanding their role in veterinary medicine, evolving from traditional dispensing functions to active contributors to clinical care and medication safety, " (Kambayashi et al., PLOS One, 2026).
- The authors recommend expanded veterinary-specific education and stronger empirical research to measure clinical outcomes, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
What happened and how the review was built
What happened: The authors conducted a scoping review and, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), searched PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ichushi-Web, and Google Scholar through 30 August 2025 to identify evidence on veterinarian–pharmacist collaboration.
How it was measured: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), two reviewers independently screened 239 retrieved records, removed 58 duplicates, screened 181 records, and ultimately included 16 studies published from 2007 to 2024.
Constraints: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), most included studies used cross-sectional surveys and perception-based methods, limiting causal inference and objective clinical outcome measurement.
Direct quotation: Kambayashi et al., PLOS One (2026) state, "Pharmacists are expanding their role in veterinary medicine, evolving from traditional dispensing functions to active contributors to clinical care and medication safety."
Findings snapshot
| Date / Source | Metric | Value | Implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30 August 2025, PLOS One search | Records retrieved | 239 | Comprehensive search but limited final evidence base |
| Included studies (2007–2024), PLOS One | Studies included | 16 | Small heterogeneous sample of study designs and regions |
| PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026) | Compounding/dispensing prevalence | 10 of 16 studies, 62.5% | Compounding is the dominant pharmacist role reported |
| PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026) | Drug information/consultation prevalence | 6 of 16 studies, 37.5% | Pharmacists provide consultative support in multiple regions |
Implications for veterinary researchers and qualitative teams
Answer: Researchers should treat the current evidence as exploratory and use mixed-methods designs to move from perception to outcome measurement, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), the literature shows regional patterns: the United States contributed 7 studies, New Zealand 3, and Japan 3, indicating that comparative research designs can reveal regulatory and cultural drivers of collaboration.
Practical step: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), future research needs standardized reporting of pharmacist activities, sample sizes, and outcome metrics such as medication errors, adherence, and occupational safety to allow cross-study synthesis.
Method note for qualitative teams: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), much of the existing data are survey- or interview-based, so researchers should preregister coding frameworks, report inter-coder agreement, and include absolute dates and counts when publishing to increase utility for systematic synthesis.
How Evidano helps: from messy literature to actionable themes
Problem: Heterogeneous sources and small samples
Answer: The evidence base is fragmented across journals, languages, and methods, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026); this complicates thematic synthesis.
Solution: Evidano can ingest mixed documents and survey spreadsheets, normalize metadata, and produce a reproducible codebook that identifies cross-study themes such as compounding (62.5% of studies) and drug information (37.5% of studies).
Feature link: See how mixed-source ingestion works on the Evidano features page.
Problem: Quantifying role frequencies and regional patterns
Answer: The PLOS One review reports clear regional variation, for example 7 US studies versus 3 Japan studies, which requires cross-segment counts to interpret, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
Solution: Evidano provides frequency and cross-segment analysis to compare roles by country, setting, and study design, producing extractable tables and visualizations ready for methods sections and meta-synthesis.
Feature link: Learn about Evidano’s visualization and cross-segment tools on the features page.
Problem: Language barriers and inaccessible non-English evidence
Answer: PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026) highlights Japanese-language studies that inform unique practices such as Kampo recommendation, and these require translation to be usable internationally.
Solution: Evidano supports translation with custom dictionaries so teams can translate non-English studies and preserve technical terms for consistent coding, reducing omission of region-specific models.
Problem: Moving beyond perceptions to outcomes
Answer: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), most studies are perception-based and lack objective clinical outcomes.
Solution: Evidano’s AI-assistant can help synthesize qualitative findings into measurable intervention hypotheses, for instance mapping pharmacist-led inventory changes to hypothesized reductions in dispensing errors for future quantitative study designs.
FAQ: veterinarian-pharmacist collaboration
What roles do pharmacists most commonly play in veterinary settings?
Answer: Pharmacists most commonly provide compounding and dispensing services, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
Supporting detail: The PLOS One review found compounding/dispensing reported in 10 of 16 studies (62.5%), with additional roles in drug information (37.5%) and inventory management (25.0%).
Why is collaboration uneven across regions?
Answer: Collaboration models reflect regulatory environments and practice culture, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
Supporting detail: The review reports technique-driven compounding in North America and Oceania, and management- and information-driven roles in parts of Asia, with Japan contributing 3 studies that emphasize inventory systems and Kampo involvement.
Can AI help synthesize the mixed methods evidence in this field?
Answer: Yes, AI-enabled qualitative methods can accelerate theme extraction, frequency counts, and cross-segment comparisons from mixed-methods literature, when designed and validated by researchers.
Supporting detail: According to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026), the current literature is small and heterogeneous, which makes reproducible AI-assisted coding and transparent codebooks valuable for scaling synthesis and informing future quantitative designs.
What immediate steps should a research team take to study pharmacist impact on veterinary outcomes?
Answer: Start with a phased mixed-methods design: document roles via qualitative interviews, then test hypothesized impacts with targeted quantitative measures, according to PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
Supporting detail: The authors recommend building collaborative community models and standardized dispensing guidelines before large outcome trials to generate the structured data needed for robust evaluation.
Conclusion & Next Steps
The PLOS One scoping review (Kambayashi et al., 2026) shows that pharmacist roles in veterinary medicine are expanding but the evidence remains small and regionally variable, with compounding reported in 62.5% of included studies and the review published on July 31, 2026.
For qualitative teams, the priority is reproducible coding, transparent counts, and active retrieval of non-English sources, as recommended by PLOS One (Kambayashi et al., 2026).
Evidano can speed mixed-source synthesis, translation, thematic coding, and cross-segment frequency analysis to convert perception-based findings into testable hypotheses; see our features page for relevant tools.
Get started by transforming your transcripts, reports, and survey spreadsheets into structured evidence. Try Evidano for free