ReviewExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2024
Key performance indicators for pharmaceutical services: A systematic review.
Review in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of educational interventions in improving antimicrobial dispensing by community pharmacists: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- 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
- Stratification system for pharmaceutical care in cancer patients: Chinese expert consensus.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Professional pharmacy Services' outcomes performance measurement: A narrative review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are a set of indicators that improve the quality of services provided by pharmacists. They enable the monitoring and evaluation of result progress and optimize decision-making for stakeholders. Currently, there is no systematic review regarding KPIs for pharmaceutical services. Objectives: To identify and assess the quality of KPIs developed for pharmaceutical services. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and LILACS from the inception of the database until February 5th, 2024. Studies that developed a set of KPIs for pharmaceutical services were included. The indicators were evaluated using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Results: Fifteen studies were included. The studies were conducted in different regions, most of which were developed for clinical services in hospitals or ambulatory settings, and used similar domains for the development of KPIs such as medication review, patient safety, and patient counseling. Literature review combined with the Delphi technique was the method most used by the studies, with content validity by inter-rater agreement. Regarding methodological quality, most studies described information on the purpose, definition, and stakeholders' involvement in the set of KPIs. However, little information was observed on the strategy for risk adjustment, instructions for presenting and interpreting the indicator results, the detailed description of the numerator and denominator, evidence scientific, and the feasibility of the set of KPIs. Only one study achieved a high methodological quality in all domains of the AIRE tool. Conclusion: Our findings showed the potential of KPIs to monitor and assess pharmacy practice quality. Future studies should expand KPIs for other settings, explore validity evidence of the existing KPIs, provide detailed descriptions of evidence, formulation, and usage, and test their feasibility in daily practice.
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.