ArticlePharmacoEconomics1996
Hypnotics. Drug selection by means of the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis (SOJA) method.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital multicriteria evaluation of negotiated medicines using Chinese mini-HTA: application of structured methodologies in assessing once-weekly GLP-1 RAs for improved clinical decision-making.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Using health outcomes data to inform decision-making: formulary committee perspective.PharmacoEconomics · 2001Article
- Dutch hospital drug formularies: pharmacotherapeutic variation and conservatism, but concurrence with national pharmacotherapeutic guidelines.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2000Article
- A comparative assessment of the risks and benefits of zopiclone: a review of 15 years' clinical experience.Drug safety · 1999Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selection of hypnotics for drug formularies in The Netherlands, France and the UK is made by means of the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis (SOJA) method. The following criteria are included in the method: clinical efficacy (maximal 300 points), adverse effects (250 points), clinical documentation (150 points), cost (120 points), pharmacokinetic properties (80 points), toxicity (50 points), drug interactions (30 points) and the number of tablet strengths available (20 points). In all 3 countries, zolpidem, zopiclone and temazepam showed the highest score, followed by lormetazepam. High scores favour inclusion in formularies. Nitrazepam and loprazolam scored 75 to 130 points less than the top 3, and flunitrazepam shows the lowest score (119 to 183 points less than zolpidem, zopiclone and temazepam). Therefore, the first 3 (or 4) hypnotics are most suitable for formulary inclusion while the others are not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10163418What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.