ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Validity of the Medication Safety Self-Assessment for Long-Term Care tool in Australian long-term care: a RAND appropriateness method study.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Validity of the Medication Safety Self-Assessment for Long-Term Care tool in Australian long-term care: a RAND appropriateness method study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 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
aimsThe validity of using the Canadian Medication Safety Self-Assessment for Long-Term Care (MSSA-LTC) tool in the international context is unknown. This study aims to determine the face and content validity of the Canadian MSSA-LTC tool for assessing medication safety-related processes in the Australian long-term care (LTC) setting.
methodsA modified two-round RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to assess the face and content validity of the 129 items in the Canadian MSSA-LTC tool for use in the Australian LTC setting. An expert panel of health professionals with expertise in medication management in the Australian LTC setting rated each item separately for relevance to the Australian LTC context (face validity) and importance for medication safety (content validity). Items, where there was panel agreement that the item was definitely or potentially relevant for the Australian context/important for medication safety, were considered valid for the relevant attribute.
resultsNine expert panel members participated in the study. The expert panel rated 118 (91.5%) of the 129 items of the MSSA-LTC tool as acceptable relevant for the Australian LTC setting and, therefore, having face validity and all items (100%) as important for medication safety, thus having good content validity. The expert panel members were unable to agree about the relevance of nine items for use in the Australian LTC context and considered two items as not relevant for the Australian LTC context.
conclusionsThe Canadian MSSA-LTC tool appears valid for measuring medication safety-related processes in Australian LTC with good face and content validity.
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.