Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34823529›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Developing and piloting a self-assessment tool for medication review competence of practicing pharmacists based on nationally set competence criteria.

Noora Lias, Tanja Lindholm, Marika Pohjanoksa-Mäntylä, Aleksi Westerholm, Marja Airaksinen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Noora LiasClinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland. noora.lias@helsinki.fi.
Tanja LindholmClinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Marika Pohjanoksa-MäntyläClinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Aleksi WesterholmClinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Marja AiraksinenClinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. box 56, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew competence requirements have emerged for pharmacists as a result of changing societal needs towards more patient-centred practices. Today, medication review competence can be considered as basic pharmaceutical competence. Medication review specific competence criteria and tools for self-assessing the competence are essential in building competences and a shared understanding of medication reviews as a collaborative practice. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot a self-assessment tool for medication review competence among practicing pharmacists in Finland.

methodsThe development of the self-assessment tool was based on the national medication review competence criteria for pharmacists established in Finland in 2017 and piloting the tool among practicing pharmacists in a national online survey in October 2018. The pharmacists self-assessed their medication review competence with a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 for "very poor/not at all" to 5 for "very good".

resultsThe internal consistency of the self-assessment tool was high as the range of the competence areas' Cronbach's alpha was 0.953-0.973. The competence areas consisted of prescription review competence (20 items, Cronbach's alpha 0.953), additional statements for medication review competence (11 additional items, Cronbach's alpha 0.963) and medication review as a whole, including both the statements of prescription review and medication review competence (31 items, Cronbach's alpha 0.973). Competence items closely related to routine dispensing were most commonly self-estimated to be mastered by the practicing pharmacists who responded (n = 344), while the more clinical and patient-centred competence items had the lowest self-estimates. This indicates that the self-assessment tool works logically and differentiates pharmacists according to competence. The self-assessed medication review competence was at a very good or good level among more than half (55%) of the respondents (n = 344).

conclusionA self-assessment tool for medication review competence was developed and validated. The piloted self-assessment tool can be used for regular evaluation of practicing pharmacists' medication review competence which is becoming an increasingly important basis for their contribution to patient care and society.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesPharmacistsFinlandHumansSelf-AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunity pharmacyContinuing educationMedication reviewMedicines policyPatient centerednessProfessional competenceProfessional developmentSelf-assessment tool

Identifiers

PMID34823529
PMCPMC8620234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.