Development of Ambulatory Oncology Clinical Pharmacy Key Performance Indicators Using a Modified Delphi Consensus Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Consensus is lacking on a means of tracking and measuring the impact of ambulatory oncology pharmacy services. Key performance indicators (KPIs), which are defined as quantifiable measures used to track the quality of various processes while determining whether institutional goals are being met, are often used in health care for this purpose. While KPIs have been developed in other pharmacy therapeutic settings, no such effort has been made to date in ambulatory oncology practice. Objectives: Describe what an ambulatory oncology clinical pharmacy key performance indicator (AOcpKPI) is and what it is used for. Explain the need for AOcpKPIs in oncology pharmacy practice and how they are involved in qualitycare and innovation. Understand the process by which consensus AOcp-KPIs were created. Identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of AOcpKPIs into clinical practice and pharmacy workflow. Methods: A systematic, modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus on AOcpKPIs. Following an environmental scan of current oncology pharmacy practices across Canada, a literature review identified critical activities linked to patient-centered outcomes. A panel of oncology pharmacists engaged in three Delphi rounds and a virtual live meeting, assessing and refining candidate AOcpKPIs on the basis of predefined criteria. A total of 17 candidate AOcpKPIs were evaluated. Results: Consensus was achieved on 14 AOcpKPIs. These AOcpKPIs reflect critical pharmacist activities including clinical order review, patient education, medication adherence assessment, and management of drug therapy problems. This suite of AOcpKPIs provides a standardized approach for evaluating oncology pharmacist activities in ambulatory care, facilitating benchmarking and supporting evidence-based improvements in patient outcomes. Conclusions: This work represents a significant advancement in defining quality metrics for ambulatory oncology pharmacy practice. The consensus-based AOcpKPIs provide a foundation for enhanced patient care, professional accountability, and continuous quality improvement within oncology pharmacy. Implementing these AOcpKPIs has the potential to elevate oncology pharmacy practice, supporting pharmacists in meeting evolving health care demands and fostering evidence-based patient outcomes. Next steps include defining and grouping AOcpKPIs to be more useable and developing a knowledge translation guide for implementation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.222 | 0.210 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".