ReviewJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2020
Development and Implementation of Clinical Outcome Measures for Automated Collection Within Specialty Pharmacy Practice.
Review in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finding consensus on meaningful reporting measures for rheumatoid arthritis: Results from a modified Delphi study.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Integrating Clinical Presentation with Patient Encounter Experience and Community-Based Activities in the Pre-clerkship Curriculum. An Example of a Framework for Design, Implementation, and Evaluation.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Evaluating patient-reported adherence and outcomes in specialty disease states: A dual-site initiative.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2024Article
- Comparison of time to treatment initiation of specialty medications between an integrated health system specialty pharmacy and external specialty pharmacies.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2024Article
- Advancing Pharmacy Practice: The Role of Intelligence-Driven Pharmacy Practice and the Emergence of Pharmacointelligence.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2024Article
- Patients Satisfaction with Pharmaceutical Care and Associated Factors in the Southwestern Ethiopia.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Identification of Five Quality Needs for Rheumatology (Text Analysis and Literature Review).Frontiers in medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundJohns Hopkins Specialty Pharmacy Services recognized the need to identify and develop standardized collection methods for clinical outcome measures (COMs) to demonstrate program quality and value to third-party payers, manufacturers, and internal stakeholders.
objectiveTo define specialty COMs and develop a framework for standardized data collection and reporting.
methodsCOMs for specialty pharmacy disease states (cystic fibrosis; hepatitis C; inflammatory conditions in dermatology, gastroenterology and rheumatology; and multiple sclerosis) were identified through a literature search, collaboration with specialty pharmacists, and committee review. Once identified, these measures were distributed to internal and external stakeholders that included specialty clinic team members, drug manufacturers, and third-party payers for input and validation. A standardized process for discrete documentation and data collection of these measures was implemented using case management software, electronic medical record integration, and informatics support.
results28 COMs were identified. The various data sources used to collect the COMs were incorporated into an automated virtual dashboard to allow for regular review and sharing with clinicians, leadership, and other key stakeholders. The virtual dashboard included COMs with data derived from electronic medical records (n = 9), patient-reported outcomes based on responses to pharmacist-delivered questions (n = 11), and pharmacist assessment of outcomes (n = 8). The completed virtual dashboard was further refined to allow for reporting of both population and patient-level outcome results on a quarterly basis.
conclusionsThis project describes methods to standardize documentation, data collection, and reporting of clinical outcomes data for multiple specialty conditions in a health system-integrated specialty pharmacy program. Through literature review and stakeholder consultation, a variety of potential COMs were identified for further evaluation of feasibility and value considering documentation and data collection requirements. Incorporation of COMs into a virtual dashboard will help facilitate the evaluation of program effectiveness, quality improvement planning, and sharing with stakeholders. Additional opportunities exist to further standardize COMs across the pharmacy industry to allow for future benchmarking and standardized evaluation of patient care programs. DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this article. The authors have no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose. This study was presented as a poster presentation at the APhA Annual Meeting, March 2018, Nashville, TN, and as a platform presentation at the Eastern States Conference, May 2018, Hershey, PA.
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.