ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2022
Development and consensus testing of quality indicators for geriatric pharmacotherapy in primary care using a modified Delphi study.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital inpatient setting: a systematic review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Pooled it
- Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe definition of quality indicators for pharmaceutical care: a systematic literature review and international consensus development.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Pooled it
- Exploration of utilizing electronic health databases in evidence-based practice among Iranian pharmacists: a survey by simulation of health-seeking pregnant women.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2026Article
- Successes and challenges towards improving quality of primary health care services: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Validation of quality indicators for evaluating geriatric pharmacotherapy services in primary care: a mixed methods study.BMJ open · 2023Observational
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background Polypharmacy is associated with an increased risk of adverse drug events in older people. Although national guidance on geriatric pharmacotherapy exists in Japan, tools to routinely monitor the quality of care provided by community pharmacists are lacking. Aim To develop a set of quality indicators (QIs) to measure the quality of care provided by community pharmacists in improving geriatric pharmacotherapy in primary care in Japan, using a modified Delphi study. Method The development of QIs for the Japanese community pharmacy context followed a two-step process: national guidance review and consensus testing using a modified Delphi study. The latter involved two rounds of rating with a face-to-face meeting between the rounds. Ten experts in geriatric pharmacotherapy in primary care were recruited for the panel discussion. QIs were mapped to three key taxonomies and frameworks: the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system, problems and causes of drug-related problems (DRPs) taxonomy and Donabedian's framework. Results A total of 134 QIs for geriatric pharmacotherapy were developed. This QI set included 111 medicine specific indicators, covering medicines in 243 third-level ATC classifications. QIs were classified into the problem of treatment safety (80%) and causes of drug selection (38%) based on validated classification for DRPs. In Donabedian's framework, most QIs (82%) were process indicators. There were no structure indicators. Conclusion A set of 134 QIs for geriatric pharmacotherapy was rigorously developed. Measurement properties of these QIs will be evaluated for feasibility, applicability, room for improvement, sensitivity to change, predictive validity, acceptability and implementation issues in a subsequent study.
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.