ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR2022
Developing a Multifaceted Evaluation Tool for Electronic Prescribing System: A Study from a Developing Country.
Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Script Shift: South African pharmacists' knowledge and perspectives of e-prescribing.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- The effect of electronic prescription systems on pharmacy performance through evaluation of existing infrastructure in Kerman Iran.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evaluation of electronic prescribing systems (EPS) can contribute to their quality assurance, and motivate users and policy-makers to implement these systems, directly influencing the health of society. An appropriate evaluation tool plays a determining role in the identification of proper EPS. The present study aimed to develop a multifaceted evaluation tool for assessing the EPS. This study was conducted in two main steps in 2018. In the first step, we conducted a literature review to find the main features and capabilities of the prosperous EPS. In the second step, a Delphi method was used for determining the final criteria for evaluating EPS. After preparing a primary questionnaire based on the first step results, 27 expert stakeholders from related fields participated in this 3-phase Delphi study. The narrative content analysis and descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. The final evaluation tool consists of 61 questions in 10 main dimensions, including practical capabilities of the process/user and patient safety, data storage and transfer, prescription control and renewal, technical functions, user interfaces, security and privacy, reporting, portability, hardware and infrastructure, and system failure/recovery. The evaluation tool developed in this study can be used for the critical appraisal of features of EPS. It is recommended that this multifaceted evaluation tool be employed to help buyers compare different systems and assist EPS software vendors in prioritizing their activities regarding the system development. By using this tool, healthcare organizations can also choose a system that improves many aspects of health care.
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.