Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26925317›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2016

Examining perceptions of the usefulness and usability of a mobile-based system for pharmacogenomics clinical decision support: a mixed methods study.

Kathrin Blagec, Katrina M Romagnoli, Richard D Boyce, Matthias Samwald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Approaches to assessing the provider experience with clinical pharmacogenomic information: a scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Integrating pharmacogenetic testing into primary care.Expert review of precision medicine and drug development · 2017
    Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Kathrin BlagecCenter for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna , Vienna , Austria.
Katrina M RomagnoliDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania , United States.
Richard D BoyceDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania , United States.
Matthias SamwaldCenter for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna , Vienna , Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4855-2571

Funding

Addressing gaps in clinically useful evidence on drug-drug interactionsR01LM011838 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2017
$1.6M
Improving medication safety for nursing home residents prescribed psychotropic drK01AG044433 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2016
$342k
Austrian Science Fund FWF P 25608-N15NIA NIH HHS K01 AG044433NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background. Pharmacogenomic testing has the potential to improve the safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapy, but clinical application of pharmacogenetic knowledge has remained uncommon. Clinical Decision Support (CDS) systems could help overcome some of the barriers to clinical implementation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perception and usability of a web- and mobile-enabled CDS system for pharmacogenetics-guided drug therapy-the Medication Safety Code (MSC) system-among potential users (i.e., physicians and pharmacists). Furthermore, this study sought to collect data on the practicability and comprehensibility of potential layouts of a proposed personalized pocket card that is intended to not only contain the machine-readable data for use with the MSC system but also human-readable data on the patient's pharmacogenomic profile. Methods. We deployed an emergent mixed methods design encompassing (1) qualitative interviews with pharmacists and pharmacy students, (2) a survey among pharmacogenomics experts that included both qualitative and quantitative elements and (3) a quantitative survey among physicians and pharmacists. The interviews followed a semi-structured guide including a hypothetical patient scenario that had to be solved by using the MSC system. The survey among pharmacogenomics experts focused on what information should be printed on the card and how this information should be arranged. Furthermore, the MSC system was evaluated based on two hypothetical patient scenarios and four follow-up questions on the perceived usability. The second survey assessed physicians' and pharmacists' attitude towards the MSC system. Results. In total, 101 physicians, pharmacists and PGx experts coming from various relevant fields evaluated the MSC system. Overall, the reaction to the MSC system was positive across all investigated parameters and among all user groups. The majority of participants were able to solve the patient scenarios based on the recommendations displayed on the MSC interface. A frequent request among participants was to provide specific listings of alternative drugs and concrete dosage instructions. Negligence of other patient-specific factors for choosing the right treatment such as renal function and co-medication was a common concern related to the MSC system, while data privacy and cost-benefit considerations emerged as the participants' major concerns regarding pharmacogenetic testing in general. The results of the card layout evaluation indicate that a gene-centered and tabulated presentation of the patient's pharmacogenomic profile is helpful and well-accepted. Conclusions. We found that the MSC system was well-received among the physicians and pharmacists included in this study. A personalized pocket card that lists a patient's metabolizer status along with critically affected drugs can alert physicians and pharmacists to the availability of essential therapy modifications.

Indexed as

ClinicalDecision support systemsIndividualized medicineMixed methods studiesPharmacogeneticsUser studies

Identifiers

PMID26925317
PMCPMC4768706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.