ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2023
Hospital pharmacists' opinions on a risk prediction tool for medication-related harm in older people.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Evaluation of Clinician and Informatician Perspectives on Medication Harm Risk Prediction Tools for Use in a Tertiary Hospital Setting.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Hospital pharmacists' opinions on a risk prediction tool for medication-related harm in older people.British journal of clinical 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimOlder adults are particularly affected by medication-related harm (MRH) during transitions of care. There are no clinical tools predicting those at highest risk of MRH post hospital discharge. The PRIME study (prospective study to develop a model to stratify the risk of MRH in hospitalized patients) developed and internally validated a risk-prediction tool (RPT) that provides a percentage score of MRH in adults over 65 in the 8 weeks following hospital discharge. This qualitative study aimed to explore the views of hospital pharmacists around enablers and barriers to clinical implementation of the PRIME-RPT.
methodsTen hospital pharmacists: (band 6, n = 3; band 7, n = 2; band 8, n = 5) participated in semistructured interviews at the Royal Sussex County Hospital (Brighton, UK). The pharmacists were presented with five case-vignettes each with a calculated PRIME-RPT score to help guide discussion. Case-vignettes were designed to be representative of common clinical encounters. Data were thematically analysed using a "framework" approach.
resultsSeven themes emerged in relation to the PRIME-RPT: (1) providing a medicine-prioritisation aide; (2) acting as a deprescribing alert; (3) facilitating a holistic review of patient medication management; (4) simplifying communication of MRH to patients and the multidisciplinary team; (5) streamlining community follow-up and integration of risk discussion into clinical practice; (6) identifying barriers for the RPTs integration in clinical practice; and (7) acknowledging its limitations.
conclusionHospital pharmacists found the PRIME-RPT beneficial in identifying older patients at high risk of MRH following hospital discharge, facilitating prioritising interventions to those at highest risk while still acknowledging its limitations.
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.