| Title |
Development of a consensus-base list of criteria for prescribing medication in a pediatric population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-015-0139-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Guérin, J. F. Bussières, R. Boulkedid, O. Bourdon, S. Prot-Labarthe |
| Abstract |
Background Although many people are involved in the optimal use of a medication within this process, the use of medications carries risks of adverse events, which are greater in the pediatric population because of many factors. Objective In this context, our aim was to develop a consensus-based list of criteria for the safety of the pediatric medication-use process or circuit (referred to from now on as the CIRCUS tool: CIRcuit-of-Child-drug-USe). Setting Multicenter with a trio of experts from eight university hospitals. Methods A literature search (1998-2013) was conducted in order to identify the different safety practice domains for the pediatric medication use process. Twenty-six safety practice domains were identified and 48 compliance criteria were formulated. In order to reach a consensus on the most relevant compliance criteria for safety practices, an international 24 French-speaking multidisciplinary panelists (8 doctors, 8 pharmacists and 8 nurses) selected to represent a broad range of experience levels and specialties took part in a two round Delphi survey which was conducted between March and July 2013. Each panelist was asked to rate each proposed criterion on a 1-9 Likert scale in order to show their level of agreement (i.e. 1 reflects strong disagreement and 9 reflects strong agreement). Main outcome measure Development of a consensus-base list for safety practices in pediatrics. Results Twenty-two of the 24 professionals invited to take part in this survey (92 % participation rate) completed the two Delphi rounds. At the end of the two Delphi rounds, a total of 38/48 (79 %) safety practice compliance criteria achieved consensus by the panelists. The criteria were grouped into 23 domains. Conclusion This study presents the development of a self-assessment tool for safety practices in the pediatric drug-use process using a Delphi method. This tool may be used in order to record and compare the prevalence of best safety practices in the pediatric drug-use process. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#5,763,064
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#276
of 1,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,460
of 266,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#8
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.