ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026
Managing emergency department patients with potential medication-related harm: a qualitative study.
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. 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.
- Prioritising medication management criteria to identify emergency department patients with potential medication-related harm: Nominal Group Technique workshops with clinicians.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
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
introductionMedication-related harm (is a challenge globally and contributes to emergency department (ED) presentations. Accurate medication histories are essential to identify whether medication-related harm contributed to an ED presentation.
aimThe aim of this study was to explore the perspectives of ED clinicians on prioritising ED patients admitted due to potential medication-related harm.
methodWe conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with purposively selected ED doctors, pharmacists, and nurses from a hospital and health service in Southeast Queensland, which includes both a tertiary and secondary ED. Participants were interviewed face-to-face May-July 2023. Interviews were guided by a piloted interview guide with seven open-ended questions focusing on clinicians' views of medication management and prioritisation in suspected medication-related harm cases.
resultsFifteen clinicians with varying ED experience levels were interviewed: five doctors, five pharmacists, five nurses. Average interview time was 19 min (9-44 min). Thematic analysis of the interview data identified two key themes and six subthemes related to the prioritisation of patients with suspected medication-related harm and the role of ED clinicians in medication management. ED clinicians used varied and inconsistent processes to identify and flag patients who were either admitted with or suffered potential medication-related harm during admission and identified a need for a strategic structured process. The value of ED pharmacists was highlighted by all non-pharmacist participants.
conclusionFindings indicate that, in the absence of standardised prioritisation processes, ED clinicians rely heavily on individual clinical judgement. This underscores the need for the development of a tool specifically designed for the ED context to guide patient prioritisation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41222602What 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.