ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2013
Development of a standardized knowledge base to generate individualized medication plans automatically with drug administration recommendations.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pilot study to assess the influence of an enhanced medication plan on patient knowledge at hospital discharge.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Trial
- Evaluating patients' comprehensibility of a standardized medication plan.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Article
- Characteristics of medication schedules used by elderly ambulatory patients.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsWe aimed to develop a generic knowledge base with drug administration recommendations which allows the generation of a dynamic and comprehensive medication plan and to evaluate its comprehensibility and potential benefit in a qualitative pilot study with patients and physicians.
methodsBased on a literature search and previously published medication plans, a prototype was developed and iteratively refined through qualitative evaluation (interviews with patients and focus group discussions with physicians). To develop the recommendations for safe administration of specific drugs we screened the summary of product characteristics (SmPC) of different exemplary brands, allocated the generated advice to groups with brands potentially requiring the same advice, and reviewed these allocations regarding applicability and appropriateness of the recommendations.
resultsFor the recommendations, 411 SmPCs of 140 different active ingredients including all available galenic formulations, routes of administrations except infusions, and administration devices were screened. Finally, 515 distinct administration recommendations were included in the database. In 926 different generic groups, 29,879 allocations of brands to general advice, food advice, indications, step-by-step instructions, or combinations thereof were made. Thereby, 27,216 of the preselected allocations (91.1%) were confirmed as appropriate. In total, one third of the German drug market was labelled with information.
conclusionsGeneric grouping of brands according to their active ingredient and other drug characteristics and allocation of standardized administration recommendations is feasible for a large drug market and can be integrated in a medication plan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.