ArticleAtencion primaria2002
[Effectiveness of a personalized information system on the quality of family doctors' medical prescription].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Prescription of drugs in family medicine: on the trail of efficiency].Atencion primaria · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of a system of personalised prescription information (PPI) to improve prescription habits of family doctors (FD); to examine how useful PPI is in maintaining these habits, and to analyse its influence through factors of the doctor and his/her environment.
designCross-sectional, descriptive pilot study to analyse conditioning factors and possible confusion; quasi-experimental intervention study to assess the effectiveness of PPI, with two groups (experimental and control) and 4 determinations (before the PPI and after: short, medium and long-term).Setting. Family doctors in the Murcia Region. SUBJECTS OF STUDY: The prescriptions of all family doctors in the Murcia region which started before PPI and which continued until the end of the study and without absences of over 10% at each measurement.Intervention. The family doctors from the Murcia city area formed the experimental group: they received PPI with specific proposals for improvement. The FDs of Cartagena and Lorca, who did not receive PPI, made up the control group. Statistical analysis. Logistical regression to identify conditioning factors. Z comparison of proportions contrasted with one-tail hypothesis to check the effectiveness of PPI. LIMITATIONS OF THE
designNon-randomised allocation to groups made comparison difficult: conditioning factors for stratification or adjustment were studied. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Confirmation of PPI s effectiveness justifies its dissemination. If there is no such confirmation, it will have to be perfected. Isolating the factors conditioning prescription that can be modified helps find ways to improve PPI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.