ArticlePloS one2019
Pharmacist-participated medication review in different practice settings: Service or intervention? An overview of systematic reviews.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Differences in Older Patients' Attitudes Toward Deprescribing at Contextual and Individual Level.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- The impact of clinical pharmacist services on patient health outcomes in Pakistan: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2021Pooled it
- Does drug dispensing improve the health outcomes of patients attending community pharmacies? A systematic review.BMC health services research · 2021Pooled it
- Medication Review and Enhanced Information Transfer at Discharge of Older Patients with Polypharmacy: a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Swiss Hospitals.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Trial
- Effects of Hospital-Based Comprehensive Medication Reviews Including Postdischarge Follow-up on Older Patients' Use of Health Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- Development of a Core Outcome Measurement Set for studies of community pharmacist-led medication reviews in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- On the "tightrope" of retail: reflections on ethical dilemmas faced by the pharmaceutical professionals in community pharmacies.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Intervention description of pharmacist-facilitated medication reviews in Nordic primary care settings: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Understanding polypharmacy for people receiving home care services: a scoping review of the evidence.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Article
- ReflACTION framework: A proposed model for implementation of clinical pharmacy services.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- "Opportunities and responsibilities": how do pharmacists assess their professionalism?BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- A pharmacist-led medication review service with a deprescribing focus guided by implementation science.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- 'He or she maybe doesn't know there is such a thing as a review': A qualitative investigation exploring barriers and facilitators to accessing medication reviews from the perspective of people from ethnic minority communities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Innovating medication reviews through a technology-enabled process.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2022Article
- Bridging the gap between academia and practice: novel organogram at the Pharmacy Council of India.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2022Article
- STOPP-START Medication Review: A Non-Randomized Trial in an Indonesian Tertiary Hospital to Improve Medication Appropriateness and to Reduce the Length of Stay of Older Adults.Hospital pharmacy · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Potentially Inappropriate Medication in Older Patients: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedication review (MR) is a pharmacy practice conducted in different settings that has a positive impact on patient health outcomes. In this context, systematic reviews on MR have restricted the assessment of this practice using criteria such as methodological quality, practice settings, and patient outcomes. Therefore, expanding research on this subject is necessary to facilitate the understanding of the effectiveness of MR and the comparison of its results.
aimTo examine the panorama of systematic reviews on pharmacist-participated MR in different practice settings.
methodsA literature search was undertaken in Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS), Embase, PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases through January 2018 using keywords for "medication review", "systematic review", and "pharmacist". Two independents investigators screened titles, abstracts, full texts; assessed methodological quality; and, extracted data from the included reviews.
resultsSeventeen systematic reviews were included, of which sixteen presented low to moderate methodological quality. Most of reviews were conducted in Europe (n = 7), included controlled primary studies (n = 16), elderly patients (n = 9), and long-term care facilities (n = 8). Seven reviews addressed MR as an intervention and thirteen reviews cited collaboration between physicians and pharmacists in the practice of MR. In addition, thirteen terminologies for MR were used and the main objective was to identify and solve drug-related problems and/or optimize the drug use (n = 11).
conclusionThere is considerable heterogeneity in practice settings, population, definitions, terminologies, and approach of MR as well as poor description of patient care process in the systematic reviews. These facts may limit the comparison, summarization and understanding of the results of MR. Furthermore, the methodological quality of most systematic reviews was below ideal. Thus, international agreement on the MR process is necessary to assess, compare and optimize the quality of care provided.
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.