MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196681194 · doi:10.30968/rbfhss.2021.213.0587

Economic impact of pharmacists' interventions in asthma management: a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3196681194 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gabriel Rodrigues Martins de Freitas, Juliana U. SANTOS, Juliana Soares de França, Rodrigo Silveira Pinto, Brayan V. Seixas

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Farmácia Hospitalar e Serviços de Saúde · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialPharmacistFamily medicineMEDLINEPharmaceutical careSystematic reviewAsthmaEconomic evaluationCochrane LibraryPharmacyNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The purpose of this study was to review in a systematically way the studies that investigated the economic impact of clinical pharmacist services delivered to asthma individuals. Methods: A systematic survey was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Lilacs and Cochrane databases aiming to grade the economic evaluations published until January 2020. English, Spanish, Portuguese or French language articles were included if they evaluated a pharmaceutical intervention aiming asthma patients and also reported economic data about these interventions. There was no limitation regarding the study design or type of economic analysis. Two independent authors assessed and selected the studies, extracted the data, and measured risk of bias. Risk of bias was measured through the Cochrane’s risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies. Results: 2,832 references were identified through the search strategy, but only seven studies met the inclusion criteria to be selected into the final analysis. Out of these seven articles, four consisted of cohort studies, and three consisted of randomized controlled trials. Instructional programs and patient counseling were the most usual components of pharmaceutical care interventions. Six articles showed statistically significant positive economic outcomes of pharmaceutical care interventions in asthma management. Moreover, pharmaceutical interventions were found to decrease hospitalizations, emergency visits, symptoms, and increase adherence to pharmacotherapy. Conclusions: Studies included showed acceptable and satisfactory cost-saving ratios, demonstrating the potential benefit of inserting the pharmacist into the multidisciplinary team. Nevertheless, long-term studies and randomized clinical trials are needed to establish solid evidence in order to expand the results found in this review to broader and different contexts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de Farmácia Hospitalar e Serviços de SaúdeSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207