ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2026
Development and Validation of Cardiology-Specific Quality Indicators for Clinical Pharmacists: A Modified Delphi Study.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical pharmacists' aspirations on prescribing in cardiology within an academic health system.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical pharmacists play a critical role in cardiology by optimizing pharmacotherapy and improving patient outcomes. However, despite their growing importance, standardized quality indicators to evaluate their impact in clinical practice remain lacking. Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a set of cardiology-specific Quality Indicator Drug Therapy Problems (QI-DTPs) defined as medication-related quality indicators focused on identifying, preventing, and resolving drug therapy problems-using a modified Delphi technique in Saudi Arabia. Methods: Twenty-three candidate QI-DTPs were developed based on a comprehensive review of current cardiology guidelines and evidence-based literature, refined by an expert advisory group. A panel of sixteen experienced clinical pharmacists with cardiology expertise from Saudi Arabia evaluated these indicators using a modified Delphi approach conducted over three iterative rounds. Each indicator was rated on a nine-point Likert scale (1 = strong disagreement to 9 = strong agreement). Indicators achieving ≥75% consensus were considered validated. Results: Sixteen expert clinical pharmacists participated (69% male, 31% female), most of whom had completed a pharmacy residency and had cardiology-related clinical experience. High levels of agreement were achieved across the Delphi rounds, and all 23 proposed QI-DTPs met the predefined ≥75% consensus threshold, demonstrating strong agreement regarding their relevance, clarity, and applicability in cardiology practice. Conclusion: The study successfully identified and validated 23 QI-DTPs, reflecting strong consensus among clinical pharmacists in Saudi Arabia. Implementation of these indicators in clinical practice could enhance the quality of cardiovascular care, reinforce pharmacist-led interventions, and promote medication safety. Future research should assess the direct impact of these quality metrics on patient outcomes.
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.