Observations from a systematic review of pharmacist‐led research in solid organ transplantation: An opinion paper of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Immunology/Transplantation Practice and Research Network

Abstract

Introduction The contributions of transplant pharmacists to clinical and translational research in the United States are ill‐defined and have not been systematically reviewed. Objectives The American College of Clinical Pharmacy Immunology/Transplantation Practice and Research Network conducted a systematic review of available pharmacist‐led research publications involving solid organ transplantation with the intent to quantify and describe pharmacist‐led research endeavors and their changes over time. Methods An electronic search of Scopus was conducted to identify publications in the field of solid organ transplantation by pharmacist authors between January 1, 1975 and May 25, 2017. Articles were excluded if they were written in non‐English languages or originated from non‐US countries. Review articles, case reports, surveys, basic science research, pre‐clinical studies, and non‐transplant research were further excluded. Studies were categorized as one of four phases on the clinical and translational research spectrum, adapted from the Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center description of a T1 to T4 classification system. Results A total of 10 354 publications were identified by the systematic search with 547 full‐text English‐language publications included in the analysis. Pharmacists served as the first author in 87% of the articles and as the senior author in 67% of the articles. A total of 71% of the articles included more than one pharmacist author. Transplant pharmacists published more studies that employed a retrospective or observational study design (55% and 78%, respectively). A total of 37% of studies were funded. On the spectrum of clinical and translation research, pharmacists were most involved in T3 (translation to practice) research (72%), followed by T2 (translation to patients) research (23%). Conclusions Transplant pharmacists are increasingly represented in the US literature and frequently published across domains. Further demonstrating the relevance of pharmacist‐delivered interventions and outcomes is a critical area of practice focus.

National survey of solid organ transplant pharmacist training and early career research publication success

“…Obtainment of primary research project publication during training was higher in those that went on to achieve ECP (ECP 64% [16/25] vs no ECP 36% [9/25]; P = 0.006). Additionally, the median total number of publications during postgraduate training was higher in those who accomplished ECP (3.5 2‐5 vs 2, 2 P = 0.03).…”

“…Importantly, representation of SOT pharmacists in research publications is increasing. A systematic review of SOT‐related research publications with one or more pharmacists from 1975 to 2017 was conducted 3 . First author (87%) and senior author (67%) positions were common for pharmacists, and many of the publications included multiple pharmacist coauthors (71%).…”

“…A SOT pharmacist workforce survey revealed that 65% of respondents were actively involved with, led, and/or supported clinical research efforts 2 . More recently, a systematic review of SOT pharmacist‐led research demonstrated that primary or senior manuscript authorship was common 3 . This unique combination of responsibilities creates meaningful opportunities for both the learner and SOT pharmacists to participate and engage in clinical research.…”

“…2 More recently, a systematic review of SOT pharmacist-led research demonstrated that primary or senior manuscript authorship was common. 3 This unique combination of responsibilities creates meaningful opportunities for both the learner and SOT pharmacists to participate and engage in clinical research.…”

Solid organ transplant residency research publication rates and characteristics associated with successful publication

“…All PGY2‐trained pharmacy specialists have integral roles in advancing the profession through literature contributions. For SOT specifically, this was recently shown in a systematic review of SOT pharmacist contributions to the literature, which identified 547 SOT publications for which pharmacists served in key authorship positions; 87% and 67% as first or senior author, respectively 5 . Given the important contributions that SOT pharmacists make to the discipline, it is important to identify both barriers and facilitators for the publication of PGY2 SOT resident projects.…”