SynthesisBMC medicine2021
Development of a model of medication review for use in clinical practice: Bristol medication review model.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patients' experiences of a patient-centred polypharmacy medication review intervention: a mixed-methods study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Trial
- Exploring the implementation and integration of structured medication reviews in primary care: a qualitative evaluation using normalisation process theory.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Large language models for post-discharge follow-up in erectile dysfunction care: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
- Understanding Undergraduate Medicines Optimisation Education and Its Importance; a Realist Evaluation.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
- Identification, classification, and documentation of drug related problems in community pharmacy practice in Europe: a scoping review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Use of the BRANT-MERQS scoring table for the quality assessment of type 3 medication review in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Pharmacist-Led Interventions for Medication Adherence in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Scoping Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Association of strong opioids and antibiotics prescribing with GP burnout: a retrospective cross-sectional study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Article
- Key elements in the quality assessment of a type 3 medication review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication review is a core aspect of medicine optimisation, yet existing models of review vary substantially in structure and content and are not necessarily easy to implement in clinical practice. This study aimed to use evidence from the existing literature to identify key medication review components and use this to inform the design of an improved review model.
methodsA systematic review was conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42018109788) to identify randomised control trials of stand-alone medication review in adults (18+ years). The review updated that by Huiskes et al. (BMC Fam Pract. 18:5, 2017), using the same search strategy implemented in MEDLINE and Embase. Studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Key review components were identified, alongside relevant clinical and health service outcomes. A working group (patients, doctors and pharmacists) developed the model through an iterative consensus process (appraisal of documents plus group discussions), working from the systematic review findings, brief evidence summaries for core review components and examples of previous models, to agree on the main purpose of the review model, overarching model structure, review components and supporting material.
resultsWe identified 28 unique studies, with moderate bias overall. Consistent medication review components included reconciliation (26 studies), safety assessment (22), suboptimal treatment (19), patient knowledge/preferences (18), adherence (14), over-the-counter therapy (13) and drug monitoring (10). There was limited evidence from studies for improvement in key clinical outcomes. The review structure was underpinned by patient values and preferences, with parallel information gathering and evaluation stages, feeding into the final decision-making and implementation. Most key components identified in the literature were included. The final model was considered to benefit from a patient-centred, holistic approach, which captured both patient-orientated and medication-focused problems, and aligned with traditional consultation methods thus facilitating implementation in practice.
conclusionsThe Bristol Medication Review Model provides a framework for standardised delivery of structured reviews. The model has the potential for use by all healthcare professionals with relevant clinical experience and is designed to offer flexibility of implementation not limited to a particular healthcare setting.
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.