Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29209863›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018

Patient-reported common symptoms as an assessment of interventions in medication reviews: a randomised, controlled trial.

Tim W A Schoenmakers, Michel Wensing, Peter A G M De Smet, Martina Teichert

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Tim W A SchoenmakersDepartment of IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. tim.schoenmakers@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0746-9445
Michel WensingDepartment of IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Peter A G M De SmetDepartment of IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Martina TeichertDepartment of IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background A 'Patient-Reported Outcome Measure, Inquiry into Side Effects' (PROMISE) instrument was developed for patients to report common symptoms in clinical medication reviews. Objective To determine changes in patient-reported drug-associated symptoms collected by PROMISE before and after community pharmacist-led clinical medication reviews compared with usual care. Setting Community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Methods Patients were randomised into an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). PROMISE was used to collect symptoms experienced during the previous month, and any suspected drug-associated symptoms from both groups at baseline and at follow-up after 3 months. IG patients received a one-time clinical medication review, while CG patients received usual care. Main outcome measure Mean number of drug-associated symptoms at follow-up. Results Measurements were completed by 78 IG and 67 CG patients from 15 community pharmacies. Mean numbers of drug-associated symptoms per patient at follow-up were 4.0 in the IG and 5.0 in the CG, with an incident rate ratio between the groups of 0.90 (95% CI 0.62-1.33). Mean numbers of drug-associated symptoms per patient reported at follow-up and persisting since baseline were 2.1 in the IG and 2.6 in the CG, with an incident rate ratio of 0.85 (95% CI 0.43-1.42). The lowest percentages of persisting drug-associated symptoms detected in the IG were 'palpitations' and 'stomach pain, dyspepsia' while in the CG they were 'stomach pain, dyspepsia' and 'trembling, shivering'. Conclusion PROMISE provided meaningful information on drug-associated symptoms in clinical medication reviews, however the number of drug-associated symptoms was not reduced by performing clinical medication reviews compared with usual care.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPharmacistsAgedAged, 80 and overDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsDrug Utilization ReviewFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMedication ReconciliationMiddle AgedNetherlandsAdverse drug eventsCommunity pharmaciesMedication reviewNetherlandsPatient-reported outcomesPharmaceutical carePROMISESide effects

Identifiers

PMID29209863
PMCPMC5840243
OpenAlexW2775603856

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.