ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Impact of a Clinical Decision Support System on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Performing Medication Reviews in Community Pharmacies: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward self-medication for common cold and influenza: A COM-B model-based cross-sectional study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Nationwide assessment of community pharmacists' practices and atorvastatin-drug interactions in Egypt.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical decision support systems (CDSSs) already support community pharmacists in conducting medication reviews (MRs) by identifying important information on interactions and suggesting clinical solutions. However, their impact in terms of quality and time savings is widely unexplored. The aim of our study was to investigate whether MRs are performed faster and better with or without using a CDSS.
methodsIn a randomized controlled study with a cross-over design, 71 pharmacists performed a total of four MRs, two with and two without the use of a CDSS. The primary endpoint was defined as the time required for the MRs. The secondary endpoints were the number of predefined relevant drug-related problems (DRPs) detected and pharmacist satisfaction.
resultsWithout the use of a CDSS, pharmacists needed between 25.7% and 30.7% more time to perform a MR than with a CDSS. In addition, significantly more relevant DRPs were detected in the MRs with CDSS than without CDSS (70% vs. 50%;
conclusionsOur results demonstrate that MRs can be performed both faster and better when using a CDSS than without. Consequently, community pharmacists benefit from the use of CDSSs for MRs, as do patients in terms of their drug therapy safety.
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.