Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41505743›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Developing an AI-Assisted Tool That Identifies Patients With Multimorbidity and Complex Polypharmacy to Improve the Process of Medication Reviews: Qualitative Interview and Focus Group Study.

Aseel S Abuzour, Samantha A Wilson, Alan A Woodall, Frances S Mair, Asra Aslam, Andrew Clegg, Eduard Shantsila, Mark Gabbay, Michael Abaho, Danushka Bollegala and 15 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Aseel S Abuzour *Academic Unit for Ageing & Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4073-4346
Samantha A Wilson *Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7959-052X
Alan A WoodallInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2933-0508
Frances S Mair *School of Health and Wellbeing, General Practice and Primary Care, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9780-1135
Asra Aslam *School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2654-4255
Andrew CleggAcademic Unit for Ageing & Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5972-1097
Eduard ShantsilaInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2429-6980
Mark Gabbay *Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0126-8485
Michael Abaho *Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5433-5904
Danushka BollegalaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4476-7003
Harriet CantDivision of Informatics, Imaging & Data Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0235-3518
Alan GriffithsNIHR Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2796-8818
Layik HamaLeeds Institute for Data Analytics, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1912-4890
Gary LeemingInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5554-5302
Emma LoInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4523-9924
Simon MaskellDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Electronics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1917-2913
Maurice O'ConnellDivision of Informatics, Imaging & Data Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9658-495X
Olusegun PopoolaMersey Care NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7160-3146
Sam ReltonSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0634-4587
Roy A RuddleLeeds Institute for Data Analytics, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8662-8103
Pieta SchofieldInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6398-2537
Matthew SperrinDivision of Informatics, Imaging & Data Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5351-9960
Tjeerd Van StaaDivision of Informatics, Imaging & Data Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9363-742X
Iain BuchanInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3392-1650
Lauren E WalkerCentre for Experimental Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3827-4387

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStructured medication reviews (SMRs) are an essential component of medication optimization, especially for patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. However, the process remains challenging due to the complexities of patient data, time constraints, and the need for coordination among health care professionals (HCPs). This study explores HCPs' perspectives on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted tools to enhance the SMR process, with a focus on the potential benefits of and barriers to adoption.

objectiveThis study aims to identify the key user requirements for AI-assisted tools to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of SMRs, specifically for patients with multimorbidity, complex polypharmacy, and frailty.

methodsA qualitative study was conducted involving focus groups and semistructured interviews with HCPs and patients in the United Kingdom. Participants included physicians, pharmacists, clinical pharmacologists, psychiatrists from primary and secondary care, a policy maker, and patients with multimorbidity. Data were analyzed using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis approach to identify themes related to AI-assisted tool functionality, workflow integration, user-interface visualization, and usability in the SMR process.

resultsFour major themes emerged from the analysis: innovative AI potential, optimizing electronic patient record visualization, functionality of the AI tool for SMRs, and facilitators of and barriers to AI tool implementation. HCPs identified the potential of AI to support patient identification and prioritizing those at risk of medication-related harm. AI-assisted tools were viewed as essential in detecting prescribing gaps, drug interactions, and patient risk trajectories over time. Participants emphasized the importance of presenting patient data in an intuitive format, with a patient interface for shared decision-making. Suggestions included color-coding blood results, highlighting critical medication reviews, and providing timelines of patient medical histories. HCPs stressed the need for AI tools to integrate seamlessly with existing electronic patient record systems and provide actionable insights without overwhelming users with excessive notifications or "pop-up" alerts. Factors influencing the uptake of AI-assisted tools included the need for user-friendly design, evidence of tool effectiveness (though some were skeptical about the predictive accuracy of AI models), and addressing concerns around digital exclusion.

conclusionsThe findings highlight the potential for AI-assisted tools to streamline and optimize the SMR process, particularly for patients with multimorbidity and complex polypharmacy. However, successful implementation depends on addressing concerns related to workflow integration, user acceptance, and evidence of effectiveness. User-centered design is crucial to ensure that AI-assisted tools support HCPs in delivering high-quality, patient-centered care while minimizing cognitive overload and alert fatigue.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMultimorbidityPolypharmacyDigital HealthFemaleFocus GroupsHumansIntelligent SystemsInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomAIartificial intelligencehealth technologymedicine optimizationrisk stratificationstructured medication reviews

Identifiers

PMID41505743
PMCPMC12828319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.