ArticleBMJ open2025
Protocol for developing a core outcome set for medicines safety at transitions of care: a systematic review, qualitative study and Delphi consensus.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedication-related problems at transitions of care are common and can lead to patient harm. Comparing results of studies that look at medication reconciliation and medication safety at transitions of care can be difficult as the outcomes reported in these studies are heterogeneous. Moreover, the outcomes measured often lack the patient's perspective. A core outcome set (COS) is a list of outcomes which should be measured and reported in studies in order to avoid heterogeneity between trials, measure outcomes relevant to stakeholders and ensure all trials report usable information. This study aims to develop a COS for medicines safety at transitions of care, through updating an existing systematic review and evaluating the perspectives of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.
methodsThis study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effective Trials (COMET) initiative and the project will be conducted following the COS-STAR (Core Outcome Set-Standards for Reporting) guidelines for the design and reporting of COSs. A four-step process will be followed: (1) updating an existing systematic literature review; (2) semistructured interviews with patients and their caregivers; (3) Delphi survey preparation involving a project steering group to compile a list of potential outcomes; (4) a three-round Delphi consensus exercise involving patients, clinicians and policymakers to refine the final core list of outcomes. ANALYSIS: This will be the first COS for medicines safety at transitions of care and will address an unmet need in providing an essential measurement approach that incorporates patients', carers' and healthcare professionals' views. The findings apply to both quality improvement and research, ensuring the relevance and translation of future research findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the qualitative surveys and Delphi technique has been granted by the Irish College of General Practitioners Research Ethics Committee (Record ID: 2182). The findings of this project will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and registration with the COMET Initiative. Members of the Delphi panel will receive summaries of the outputs, and findings will also be shared with the patient and public involvement groups involved in the study through lay summaries. Engagement with professional societies, healthcare organisations and patient groups will ensure that the COS is widely accessible and adopted into future practice.
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.