ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Entrustable Professional Activities for Pharmacists Carrying Out Medication Management Reviews.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the suitability of previously validated Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for pharmacists carrying out medication management reviews (MMRs) and further align them with nationally accepted performance outcomes (POs). This was a two-phase study involving Subject-Matter Experts (SMEs). Phase 1 aimed at assessing the relevance of 14 EPAs previously validated for use in a provisionally registered pharmacist training programme to the role of MMR pharmacists utilising a five-point Likert scale. A 70% threshold for "agree" and "strongly agree" was used to qualify an EPA for phase 2. During phase 2, EPAs were mapped for their ability to demonstrate APC performance outcomes for MMRs and the results were descriptively reported. Of the eight SMEs recruited, seven completed both surveys. Of the 14 EPAs, 12 qualified for phase 2. In phase 2, the 12 EPAs were mapped against 24 POs. Five EPAs were matched with 100% agreement to six POs. To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind to map pre-validated EPAs to POs for credentialing in the scope of MMR pharmacists in Australia. A total of 12 EPAs were applicable to pharmacists working in the MMR space, and five were able to be directly mapped to six POs.
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.