ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Tele-triaging: a qualitative study exploring pharmacists' clinical decision-making in a Poisons Information Centre using interviews and a clinical vignette.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSpecialists in Poisons Information (SPIs), most of whom are pharmacists, work in Australian Poisons Information Centres (PICs) and provide telephone-based triage (tele-triage) and management advice for poison exposures. Australian PICs answer calls from the public and healthcare practitioners and are considered an emergency telephone service. While tele-triaging and clinical decision-making have been explored in other health professions, limited studies are available exploring how pharmacists apply their knowledge to make clinical decisions in a busy tele-triage emergency setting.
aimTo explore how SPIs apply clinical judgement in tele-triage and to understand the factors that shape their decision-making.
methodThis study represents the second, qualitative phase of an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design examining calls related to unintentional poisoning exposures in older adults (≥ 75 years) to the New South Wales PIC. Semi-structured interviews with 12 SPIs were conducted, supported by clinical vignettes and analysed using an inductive approach. Thematic analysis was combined with process mapping to describe the decision-making process.
resultsSPIs followed a flexible, three-phase process of information gathering, risk stratification, and management decision-making. This process was iterative, shaped by experience, clinical knowledge, and the urgency of the call. Decision-making relied on the ability to balance known and uncertain risks, interpret caller information, and assess social and clinical context. While structured guidelines supported consistency, SPIs emphasised the importance of clinical autonomy, particularly in complex cases. A strong collegial culture and peer learning were central to developing decision-making skills. Time pressure and documentation requirements created tensions, highlighting the need to align workflows with clinical priorities.
conclusionSPI decision-making is a dynamic, context-dependent process that combines clinical expertise, guideline use, and real-time judgement. Findings have implications for SPI training, documentation systems, and the design of telehealth services involving complex risk assessment.
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.