SynthesisInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2024
Clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital inpatient setting: a systematic review.
Synthesis in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation and Resource Optimization of an Oral Anticancer Medication Clinical Pharmacy Trainee Program: Operational and Financial Impact at a Tertiary Cancer Centre.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Performance Measurement and Management in Child and Adolescent Healthcare Services.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Key performance indicators for hospital clinical pharmacy services: results of a global Delphi study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- The impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on hospital discharge medication error prevalence: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Exploring the suitability of a ward-based clinical pharmacy activity collection tool for ambulatory care practice: a mixed-methods study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- The nature of inquiries and responses in clinical pharmacy teleconsultation service: a retrospective study from Türkiye.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
- Stratification system for pharmaceutical care in cancer patients: Chinese expert consensus.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
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
backgroundKey performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures used to monitor the quality of health services. Implementation guidelines for clinical pharmacy services (CPS) do not specify KPIs.
aimTo assess the quality of the studies that have developed KPIs for CPS in inpatient hospital settings.
methodA systematic review was conducted by searching in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, supplemented with citation analyses and grey literature searches, to retrieve studies addressing the development of KPIs in CPS for hospital inpatients. Exclusions comprised drug- or disease-specific studies and those not written in English, French, Portuguese, or Spanish. The Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument assessed methodological quality. Domain scores and an overall score were calculated using an equal-weight principle. KPIs were classified into structure, process, and outcome categories. The protocol is available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KS2G3 .
resultsWe included thirteen studies that collectively developed 225 KPIs. Merely five studies scored over 50% on the AIRE instrument, with domains #3 (scientific evidence) and #4 (formulation and usage) displaying low scores. Among the KPIs, 8.4% were classified as structure, 85.8% as process, and 5.8% as outcome indicators. The overall methodological quality did not exhibit a clear association with a major focus on outcomes. None of the studies provided benchmarking reference values.
conclusionThe KPIs formulated for evaluating CPS in hospital settings primarily comprised process measures, predominantly suggested by pharmacists, with inadequate evidence support, lacked piloting or validation, and consequently, were devoid of benchmarking reference values.
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.