支持医院药房政策的参考文献评价。

Q1 Social Sciences
Bianca Aprilliano, Christopher Giuliano, Jason B Reed, Pramodini Kale-Pradhan
{"title":"支持医院药房政策的参考文献评价。","authors":"Bianca Aprilliano,&nbsp;Christopher Giuliano,&nbsp;Jason B Reed,&nbsp;Pramodini Kale-Pradhan","doi":"10.1080/02763869.2023.2160119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is a lack of research evaluating the role of references in hospital policies. The goal of this study was to describe the type of literature used as a reference in medication policies and evaluate the agreement of the policy with evidence-based guidelines. One hundred forty-seven pharmacy owned policies met inclusion criteria; 27.2% of the policies contained references, in which tertiary literature was the most frequently cited source (90%), followed by primary (47.5%), and lastly secondary (27.5%). When references were used, all policies agreed with current guidelines. For policies without references, 3.7% disagreed with published guidelines. Disagreement with guidelines may negatively impact patient care, therefore health systems should incorporate librarians into clinical policy development and review to ensure the best available evidence is incorporated into polices.</p>","PeriodicalId":39720,"journal":{"name":"Medical Reference Services Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of References Supporting Hospital Pharmacy Policies.\",\"authors\":\"Bianca Aprilliano,&nbsp;Christopher Giuliano,&nbsp;Jason B Reed,&nbsp;Pramodini Kale-Pradhan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02763869.2023.2160119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There is a lack of research evaluating the role of references in hospital policies. The goal of this study was to describe the type of literature used as a reference in medication policies and evaluate the agreement of the policy with evidence-based guidelines. One hundred forty-seven pharmacy owned policies met inclusion criteria; 27.2% of the policies contained references, in which tertiary literature was the most frequently cited source (90%), followed by primary (47.5%), and lastly secondary (27.5%). When references were used, all policies agreed with current guidelines. For policies without references, 3.7% disagreed with published guidelines. Disagreement with guidelines may negatively impact patient care, therefore health systems should incorporate librarians into clinical policy development and review to ensure the best available evidence is incorporated into polices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Reference Services Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Reference Services Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2023.2160119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Reference Services Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2023.2160119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前缺乏评价参考文献在医院政策中的作用的研究。本研究的目的是描述作为药物政策参考文献的类型,并评估该政策与循证指南的一致性。147项自有药房政策符合纳入标准;27.2%的政策包含参考文献,其中三级文献是最常被引用的来源(90%),其次是一级文献(47.5%),最后是二级文献(27.5%)。当使用引用时,所有政策都与当前的指导方针一致。对于没有参考的政策,3.7%的人不同意公布的指导方针。与指南的分歧可能会对患者护理产生负面影响,因此卫生系统应将图书馆员纳入临床政策制定和审查,以确保将现有的最佳证据纳入政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of References Supporting Hospital Pharmacy Policies.

There is a lack of research evaluating the role of references in hospital policies. The goal of this study was to describe the type of literature used as a reference in medication policies and evaluate the agreement of the policy with evidence-based guidelines. One hundred forty-seven pharmacy owned policies met inclusion criteria; 27.2% of the policies contained references, in which tertiary literature was the most frequently cited source (90%), followed by primary (47.5%), and lastly secondary (27.5%). When references were used, all policies agreed with current guidelines. For policies without references, 3.7% disagreed with published guidelines. Disagreement with guidelines may negatively impact patient care, therefore health systems should incorporate librarians into clinical policy development and review to ensure the best available evidence is incorporated into polices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Reference Services Quarterly
Medical Reference Services Quarterly Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: This highly acclaimed, peer-reviewed journal is an essential working tool for medical and health sciences librarians. For those professionals who provide reference and public services to health sciences personnel in clinical, educational, or research settings, Medical Reference Services Quarterly covers topics of current interest and practical value in the areas of reference in medicine and related specialties, the biomedical sciences, nursing, and allied health. This exciting and comprehensive resource regularly publishes brief practice-oriented articles relating to medical reference services, with an emphasis on user education, database searching, and electronic information. Two columns feature the Internet and informatics education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信