Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34855888›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

A mixed methods evaluation of medication reconciliation in the primary care setting.

Michael R Gionfriddo, Vanessa Duboski, Allison Middernacht, Melissa S Kern, Jove Graham, Eric A Wright

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. AI-Based Automation for Medication Reconciliation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael R GionfriddoCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1391-7072
Vanessa DuboskiCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America.
Allison MiddernachtWilkes University School of Pharmacy, Wilkes-Barre, PA, United States of America.
Melissa S KernCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America.
Jove GrahamCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America.
Eric A WrightCenter for Pharmacy Innovation and Outcomes, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States of America.
Wilkes University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo understand the extent to which behaviors consistent with high quality medication reconciliation occurred in primary care settings and explore barriers to high quality medication reconciliation.

designFully mixed sequential equal status design including ethnographic observations, semi-structured interviews, and surveys.

settingPrimary care practices within an integrated healthcare delivery system in the United States.

participantsWe conducted 170 observations of patient encounters across 15 primary care clinics, 48 semi-structured interviews with staff, and 10 semi-structured interviews with patients. We also sent out surveys to 2,541 eligible staff with 616 responses (24% response rate) and to 5,132 eligible patients with 577 responses (11% response rate).

resultsInconsistency emerged as a major barrier to effective medication reconciliation. This inconsistency was present across a variety of factors such as the lack of standardized workflows for conducting medication reconciliation, a lack of knowledge about medication and the process of medication reconciliation, varying levels of importance ascribed to medication reconciliation, and inadequate integration of medication reconciliation into clinical workflows. Findings were generally consistent across all data collection methods.

conclusionWe have identified several barriers which impact the process of medication reconciliation in primary care settings. Our key finding is that the process of medication reconciliation is plagued by inconsistencies which contribute to inaccurate medication lists. These inconsistencies can be broken down into several categories (standardization, knowledge, importance, and inadequate integration) which can be targets for future studies and interventions.

Indexed as

Quality Assurance, Health CareQuality ImprovementAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMedication ErrorsMedication ReconciliationMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CarePrimary Health CareWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID34855888
PMCPMC8638945
OpenAlexW3217169888

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.