Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10147029›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics1992

A review of limited lists and formularies: are they cost-effective?

M J Pearce, E J Begg

Abstract readHistorical Article
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A UK national prescribing list?PharmacoEconomics · 1995
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M J PearceDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Christchurch Hospital, New Zealand.
E J Begg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 'limited list' or 'formulary' concept has been used to promote rational use of drugs and to set standards for drug use. Recently the concept has been aimed more toward containment of drug costs. Effective hospital formulary systems assist in purchasing and inventory management. Application of the formulary concept has resulted in savings within specific classes of drugs and in total hospital drug costs. Key features which promote effectiveness are development of policies by prescriber consensus and continued education along with feedback on drug usage. The formulary concept also provides a foundation for appropriate use of drugs in hospitals. In the community setting, limited lists can achieve cost savings and can assist in the rational use of drugs. National limited lists have been less successful in controlling overall drug costs, probably because they have focused on economic effects, rather than education, feedback or user participation. Properly organised drug rationalisation policies embracing the limited list concept can improve health outcomes by promoting rational drug use. They can also contain or reduce drug costs.

Indexed as

Drug CostsFormularies as TopicAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisCost ControlDrug UtilizationEconomics, PharmaceuticalEuropeHealth PolicyHistory, 18th CenturyHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, AncientHumansPharmacopoeias as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.