Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30610541›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019

Adaptation and validation of PCNE drug-related problem classification v6.2 in French-speaking Belgian community pharmacies.

M Koubaity, M Lelubre, G Sansterre, K Amighi, C De Vriese

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Drug-related problems and risk factors related to unplanned hospital readmission among cancer patients in Belgium.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

M KoubaityDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe, CP 207, Access 2, Campus de la Plaine, Building BC, Local 1B7 101, 1050, Brussels, Belgium. mkoubait@ulb.ac.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5569-6020
M LelubreDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe, CP 207, Access 2, Campus de la Plaine, Building BC, Local 1B7 101, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
G SansterreDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe, CP 207, Access 2, Campus de la Plaine, Building BC, Local 1B7 101, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
K AmighiDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe, CP 207, Access 2, Campus de la Plaine, Building BC, Local 1B7 101, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
C De VrieseDepartment of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Boulevard du Triomphe, CP 207, Access 2, Campus de la Plaine, Building BC, Local 1B7 101, 1050, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Many tools exist to document drug-related problems (DRP), such as the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) classification. However, none have been adapted and published for French-speaking Belgian community pharmacies. Settings French-speaking Belgian Community pharmacies. Objective The objective was to translate and adapt the PCNE V6.2 classification to the Belgian pharmacy practice and legal setting and to assess the content validity, daily use and inter-rater reliability of this classification. Main Outcome Measure Validation of the French-language adapted PCNE v6.2 classification in Belgium. Method The first step translated and adapted the PCNE V6.2 classification to the Belgian setting. Thereafter academic and community pharmacists evaluated the content validity, which involved six criteria and concerned the instruction manual (clarity, helpfulness) and the registration form (representativeness, logical design, completeness and uniqueness). The next step was the DRP collection, using the PCNE tool daily. Compliance with the instructions and the time needed to solve a DRP were evaluated. Finally, the inter-rater reliability was evaluated by comparing DRP codings done by pharmacist volunteers. Results The classification was translated into French and adapted by adding 16 items. The classification showed a high content validity for the academics and the community pharmacists. A total of 109 DRP forms were coded, with an average resolution time of 5 min. Regarding the inter-rater reliability, 74 tool items out of the set of 83 showed high consistency in coding. Conclusion This study showed that the tool adaptation to a French-speaking Belgian context was reliable and has adequate validity for daily use.

Indexed as

MultilingualismTranslatingBelgiumCommunity Pharmacy ServicesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansPharmaceutical ServicesPharmacistsReproducibility of ResultsBelgiumClassification systemCommunity pharmacy practiceDrug-related problemsFrench translationPCNEValidation

Identifiers

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.