Summary of findings for the main comparison. Pharmacists' non‐dispensing roles targeting non‐hospitalised patients compared with the delivery of no comparable service for health problem or population.
| Pharmacists' non‐dispensing roles targeting non‐hospitalised patients compared with the delivery of no comparable service for health problem or population | |||||
| Patient or population: Health problem or population Setting: Outpatient settings Intervention: Pharmacist services targeting patients Comparison: Delivery of no comparable service | |||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | |
| Risk with the delivery of no comparable service | Risk with Pharmacist services targeting patients | ||||
| % outside blood pressure range | Study population | OR 0.40 (0.29 to 0.55) | 4107 (18 randomised trials) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝a,b,c,d LOW | |
| 550 per 1000 | 328 per 1000 (261 to 402) | ||||
| % outside HbA1c range | Study population | OR 0.29 (0.04 to 2.22) | 558 (5 randomised trials) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝b,d,e,f VERY LOW | |
| 782 per 1000 | 509 per 1000 (125 to 888) | ||||
| Hospital attendance/admission | Study population | OR 0.85 (0.65 to 1.11) | 3631 (14 randomised trials) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝b MODERATE | |
| 214 per 1000 | 188 per 1000 (150 to 232) | ||||
| Adverse drug effects | Study population | OR 1.65 (0.84 to 3.24) | 590 (3 randomised trials) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝b,g LOW | |
| 139 per 1000 | 211 per 1000 (120 to 344) | ||||
| SF‐36 Physical Functioning | The mean SF‐36 Physical Functioning was 53.2 | MD 5.84 higher (1.21 higher to 10.48 higher) | ‐ | 1329 (7 randomised trials) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝b,g LOW |
| Mortality | Study population | ||||
| 137 per 1000 | 111 per 1000 (81 to 150) | OR 0.79 (0.56, 1.12) | 1980 (9 randomised trials) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝b,g LOW | |
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; OR: Odds ratio; MD: Mean difference | |||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect | |||||
aWe downgraded the evidence by one level because of serious inconsistency. bWe downgraded the evidence by one level because of serious indirectness of evidence. cWe downgraded the evidence by one level because of suspected publication bias. dWe upgraded the evidence by one level because of the magnitude of the effect. eWe downgraded the evidence by two levels because of very serious inconsistency. fWe downgraded the evidence by two levels because of very serious imprecision. gWe downgraded the evidence by one level because of serious imprecision.