ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2022
Validation of an assessment, medical problem-oriented plan, and care plan tools for demonstrating the clinical pharmacist's activities.
Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Development and evaluation of the pharmacist intervention evaluation (PIE) system: a modified classification for drug-related problems in Chinese tertiary hospitals.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Nursing interventions based on Snyder's hope theory for depression following percutaneous coronary interventions: A clinical study.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Efficacy of comprehensive nursing in stabilizing perioperative hemodynamic indicators and reducing complications in patients under general anesthesia.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Assessment of Medical Care Strategies for Primary Hypertension in Iraqi Adults: A Hospital-Based Problem-Oriented Plan.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Drug-related problems in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Review
- Comparison of Drug-Related Problems in COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Patients Provided by a German Telepharmacy Service for Rural Intensive Care Units.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Illustrating How to Use the Validated Alsayed_v1 Tools to Improve Medical Care: A Particular Reference to the Global Initiative for Asthma 2022 Recommendations.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Assessing the Pharmacist's Role in Counseling Asthmatic Adults Using the Correct Inhaler Technique and Its Effect on Asthma Control, Adherence, and Quality of Life.Patient preference and adherence · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Identifying, preventing, and resolving medical problems are some of the most central functions of clinical pharmacy (CP) and pharmaceutical care (PC) practitioners. Usually, the practitioners and researchers find a challenging to link the problem and the appropriate intervention to be included in the care plan. A comprehensive, well-structured, validated, simple use and standardized tool, which fulfill these requirements in daily clinical practice, are currently rare. Purpose: To design and validate a comprehensive medical problem-oriented plan (MPOP) classification system in addition to assessment and care plan tools for use in practicing, researching, and teaching CP and PC. Materials and methods: The methodology was composed of five steps: literature searching and classification of the problems; developing the assessment of treatments and care plan templates; implementing the tutorial; validation; completion and evaluation of the final version. Results: The classification system (MPOP tool) is an open hierarchical structure, where higher levels are broadly defined, consisting of 5 main categories, and lower levels become more specific. In the MPOP tool's final version, a total of 24 major subcategories were distributed to the major five categories as 4 (Indication), 5 (Effectiveness), 7 (Safety), 3 (Patient), and 5 (Miscellaneous). Different minor subcategories (subcategory 2, n = 62) and 95 plans (interventions) were determined. Each of the subcategories and plans includes a notes section that represents a specific detail. There was strong agreement on using the MPOP tool between the two authors (κ = 1.000, p < 0.0005) and between three random clinical pharmacists out of 17 (κ = 0.947, 95% CI, 0.840 to 1.055, p < 0.0005). The validity and reliability statistics demonstrate that the Alsayed_v1 tools are extremely appropriate. The majority of users expressed high satisfaction with all the assessment, MPOP, and care plan tools. Conclusion: The Alsayed_v1 tools introduced in this paper were applied to actual patient cases and were validated. These tools include: assessment of treatments, MPOP, and care plan. Including the interventions in the classification system is important especially in PC research where the type of recommendations should be documented to assess the value and impact of the service and saves the time of practitioners in typing the appropriate interventions. By applying the steps within these Alsayed tools, the clinical pharmacists can actively provide the best practice to achieve the optimal patient outcome.
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.