ReviewInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2024
Development and partial validation of Be-CLIPSS: a classification system for hospital clinical pharmacy activities.
Review in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2024. 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.
- 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
- Hospital Pharmacists' Perspectives on Documenting and Classifying Pharmaceutical Interventions: A Nationwide Validation Study in Portugal.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
backgroundDocumentation of drug related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) is essential for an objective evaluation of the pharmacist's contribution to pharmacotherapy. However, in Belgium, a nationally used classification system is not available, prohibiting structured and uniform documentation of DRPs and PIs.
aimTo develop and validate a national classification system for in-hospital clinical pharmacy activities, based on literature and field experience, specifically intended for routine registration.
methodBased on a literature review, a survey among Belgian hospital pharmacists and a stakeholder focus group, a first version of Be-CLIPSS (Belgian CLInical Pharmacy claSsification System) was developed. Inter-rater reliability of the DRPs and PIs was assessed. Additionally, its usability was reviewed. The system was further refined, followed by a second validation.
resultsBoth the survey and focus group discussion revealed little use of validated DRP and PI classification systems in Belgium, although these were considered highly desirable if practical and minimally time-consuming. The final classification system encompassed seven clinical pharmacy activities, grouped into four activity classes. The inter-rater reliability for the second activity class was substantial for the DRPs (κ = 0.737) and almost perfect for the PIs (κ = 0.872). The interpretability (86.4%), user-friendliness (61.4%), user satisfaction (84.1%), interest for use in daily practice (68.2%) and difficulty in correctly classifying the DRP and PI (31.8%) were assessed.
conclusionBe-CLIPSS, a newly developed and partially validated classification system for DRPs and PIs, was found to be user-friendly, with a good interpretability and user satisfaction, resulting in a high interest for use in daily practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37658157What 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.