ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019
An evaluation of the user-friendliness of Bayesian forecasting programs in a clinical setting.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Model-Informed Precision Dosing in Pediatric Patients: Current Software Tools and Bedside Guided Application.Paediatric drugs · 2026Pooled it
- Awareness, use, attitudes, and implementation challenges of Bayesian dose prediction software in clinical practice: a multi-organizational survey.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Exploring Health Care Professionals' Engagement With a Precision Dosing Calculator and Supporting Clinical Information: Insights From an Eye-Tracking and Usability Study.Therapeutic drug monitoring · 2025Article
- Determination of a vancomycin nephrotoxicity threshold and assessment of target attainment in hematology patients.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2024Article
- Personalized Dosing of Medicines for Children: A Primer on Pediatric Pharmacometrics for Clinicians.Paediatric drugs · 2024Review
- Factors Influencing Integration and Usability of Model-Informed Precision Dosing Software in the Intensive Care Unit.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Article
- The clinical application of beta-lactam antibiotic therapeutic drug monitoring in the critical care setting.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2023Review
- A Drug Safety Concept (I) to Avoid Polypharmacy Risks in Transplantation by Individual Pharmacotherapy Management in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Immunosuppressants.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- When and How to Use MIC in Clinical Practice?Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Semi-Automated Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a Pillar toward Personalized Medicine for Tuberculosis Management.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Comparative hard x-ray tomography for virtual histology of zebrafish larva, human tooth cementum, and porcine nerve.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2022Article
- Review
- Evaluation of two software using Bayesian methods for monitoring exposure and dosing once-daily intravenous busulfan in paediatric patients receiving haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2021Article
- External Validation of Model-Based Dosing Guidelines for Vancomycin, Gentamicin, and Tobramycin in Critically Ill Neonates and Children: A Pragmatic Two-Center Study.Paediatric drugs · 2020Article
- Target Drug Exposure Attainment in Children: How to Get from Better to Best.Paediatric drugs · 2020Article
- Mobile Health Apps for Improvement of Tuberculosis Treatment: Descriptive Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Review
- Challenges of Vancomycin Dosing and Therapeutic Monitoring in Neonates.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2020Review
- Software Tools for Model-Informed Precision Dosing: How Well Do They Satisfy the Needs?Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
- The Steps to Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: A Structured Approach Illustrated With Imatinib.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Review
- A Fast Parameter Identification Framework for Personalized Pharmacokinetics.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate 3 Bayesian forecasting (BF) programs-TDMx, InsightRx and DoseMe-on their user-friendliness and common liked and disliked features through a survey of hospital pharmacists.
methodsClinical pharmacists across 3 Australian hospitals that did not use a BF program were invited to a BF workshop and complete a survey on programs they trialled. Participants were given 4 case scenarios to work through and asked to complete a 5-point Likert scale survey evaluating the program's user-friendliness. Liked and disliked features of each program were ascertained through written responses to open-ended questions. Survey results were compared using a χ
resultsTwenty-seven pharmacists, from hospitals, participated. BF programs were rated overall as user-friendly with 70%, 41% and 37% (P = .02) of participants recording a Likert score of 4 or 5 for DoseMe, TDMx and InsightRx, respectively. Participants found it easy to access all required information to use the programs, understood dosing recommendations and visualisations given by each program, and thought programs supported decision-making with >50% of participants scoring a 4 or 5 across the programs in these categories. Common liked features across all programs were the graphical displays and ease of data entry, while common disliked features were related to the units, layout and information display.
conclusionAlthough differences exist between programs, all 3 programs were most commonly rated as user-friendly across all themes evaluated, which provides useful information for healthcare facilities wanting to implement a BF program.
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.