Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24528252›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2014

Assessing the safety features of electronic patient medication record systems used in community pharmacies in England.

Oluwagbemileke Ojeleye, Anthony J Avery, Matthew J Boyd

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Oluwagbemileke OjeleyeDivision of Social Research in Medicines and Health, School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Anthony J Avery
Matthew J Boyd
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate the ability of electronic patient medication record (ePMR) systems used in community pharmacies in England to detect and alert users about clinical hazards, errors and other safety problems.

methodsBetween September 2012 and November 2012, direct on-site observational data about the performance of ePMR systems were collected from nine sites. Twenty-eight scenarios were developed by consensus agreement between a general practitioner and two community pharmacists. Each scenario was entered into the ePMR system, and the results obtained from the assessment of six unique systems in nine sites, in terms of the presence or absence of an alert, were recorded onto a prespecified form.

resultsNone of the systems produced the correct responses for all of the 28 scenarios tested. Only two systems provided an alert to penicillin sensitivity. No dose or frequency check was observed when processing a prescription for methotrexate. One system did not warn about nonsuitability of aspirin prescribed to a child of 14 years of age. In another system, it was not possible to record a patient's pregnancy status. None of the six systems provided any warning for diclofenac overdose, high initiation dose of morphine sulfate or significant dose increase. Only one of the systems did not produce any spurious alerts.

conclusionsThe performance of the ePMR systems tested was variable and suboptimal. The findings suggest the need for minimum specifications and standards for ePMR systems to ensure consistency of performance.

Indexed as

Patient SafetyDrug InteractionsElectronic Health RecordsEnglandMedication ErrorsPharmaciesSoftwaredecision supportelectronic patient medication record systempharmacy computer systemsafety alertsafety featuresafety warning

Identifiers

PMID24528252
PMCPMC4137832
OpenAlexW1727746817

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.