Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35032251›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2022

Risk factors for clinically relevant deviations in patients' medication lists reported by patients in personal health records: a prospective cohort study in a hospital setting.

Denise J van der Nat, Margot Taks, Victor J B Huiskes, Bart J F van den Bemt, Hein A W van Onzenoort

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2022. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medication discrepancies and medication-related problems in psychiatric patients: A medication reconciliation study.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Safe Staffing Standards for Pharmacy Technicians in Hospital Settings.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Denise J van der NatDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Breda, The Netherlands. dvandernat@amphia.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7790-9712
Margot TaksDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Breda, The Netherlands.
Victor J B HuiskesDepartment of Pharmacy, St. Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Bart J F van den BemtDepartment of Pharmacy, St. Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hein A W van OnzenoortDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences (RIHS), Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Breda University of Applied Sciences · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLSint Maartenskliniek · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Personal health records have the potential to identify medication discrepancies. Although they facilitate patient empowerment and broad implementation of medication reconciliation, more medication discrepancies are identified through medication reconciliation performed by healthcare professionals. Aim We aimed to identify the factors associated with the occurrence of a clinically relevant deviation in a patient's medication list based on a personal health record (used by patients) compared to medication reconciliation performed by a healthcare professional. Method Three- to 14 days prior to a planned admission to the Cardiology-, Internal Medicine- or Neurology Departments, at Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands, patients were invited to update their medication file in their personal health records. At admission, medication reconciliation was performed by a pharmacy technician. Deviations were determined as differences between these medication lists. Associations between patient-, setting-, and medication-related factors, and the occurrence of a clinically relevant deviation (National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention class [Formula: see text] E) were analysed. Results Of the 488 patients approached, 155 patients were included. Twenty-four clinically relevant deviations were observed. Younger patients (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.94; 95%CI:0.91-0.98), patients who used individual multi-dose packaging (aOR 14.87; 95%CI:2.02-110), and patients who used [Formula: see text] 8 different medications, were at highest risk for the occurrence of a clinically relevant deviation (sensitivity 0.71; specificity 0.62; area under the curve 0.64 95%CI:0.52-0.76). Conclusion Medication reconciliation is the preferred method to identify medication discrepancies for patients with individual multi-dose packaging, and patients who used eight or more different medications.

Indexed as

Health Records, PersonalPatient AdmissionHospitals, TeachingHumansMedication ReconciliationProspective StudiesRisk FactorsDrug informationMedication errorsMedication reconciliationMedication safetyPersonal health record

Identifiers

PMID35032251
PMCPMC9007785
OpenAlexW4205809882

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.