ArticleBMJ open2026
Pharmacist prescribing in hospital inpatient settings: what works, for whom, why and in what circumstances-a realist review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
introductionPharmacist prescribing has been introduced to alleviate pressures on hospital services and improve timely access to treatment. However, implementation in inpatient settings remains highly variable, with pockets of excellent practice alongside areas where prescribing roles are limited or absent. Traditional effectiveness reviews have demonstrated positive impacts of pharmacist prescribing on clinical and service outcomes yet offer limited insight into how contextual conditions and underlying mechanisms interact to produce results in complex hospital inpatient environments. This realist review aims to develop and refine programme theory (PT) explaining how pharmacist prescribing in hospital inpatient settings works, for whom, why and in what circumstances, with particular attention to the factors that support or constrain successful implementation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review will follow Pawson's six-stage realist synthesis process andRealist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards guidance, moving iteratively between theory development, searching, selection, data extraction and synthesis. A multidisciplinary stakeholder advisory group and patient and public involvement group will work alongside the review team to feedback on the scope, refinement of context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) and implementation recommendations. Initial programme theories will be developed and then refined using evidence from formal searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus alongside grey literature. Data will be extracted into a descriptive spreadsheet and coded in NVivo using deductive, inductive and retroductive approaches to identify, test and refine CMOCs. The final output will be a refined PT and practical recommendations to inform design, implementation and scaling of pharmacist prescribing roles in hospital inpatient care with attention to equity and acceptability for patients and multidisciplinary teams. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this realist review as it involves secondary analysis of published articles and grey literature. Dissemination will include peer-reviewed publications, presentations to pharmacy departments and professional bodies, as well as co-produced accessible materials with patient and public groups to support knowledge mobilisation. The review protocol has been registered on PROSPERO. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420261283633.
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.