ArticleAtencion primaria2003
[A system, developed by prescribing doctors, of indicators of the quality of pharmaceutical prescription in primary care].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Variability in the measurement of the pharmaceutical prescription quality by autonomous communities].Atencion primaria · 2010Article
- [Selection of quality indicators for primary care prescription through a consensus group].Atencion primaria · 2006Article
- [Evaluation of the quality of pharmaceutical prescription: are we not forgetting to measure patients health outcomes?].Atencion primaria · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo work out a system of indicators and standards, designed by means of a consensus group of general practitioners, that enables evaluation of the quality of Primary Care prescription to be improved. Design. Informal consensus method.
settingA PC area in Asturias with 156 614 inhabitants and 9 health centres.Participants. Nine PC doctors accepted voluntarily to take part in the project.
methodA consensus group of nine PC doctors was formed. At a first meeting they worked out some potential indicators of quality of prescription. After applying these indicators to the prescription data, a second meeting was held, at which the results of applying the indicators along with criteria of excellence were used to establish the definitive indicators and their numerical values of optimum compliance.
resultsIt was possible to agree by consensus 11 indicators of quality of prescription and their values of optimum compliance. Eight of the indicators referred to choice of a medicine within a pharmaco-therapeutic group; and three, to groups in which the volume of prescription may suggest improper usage.
conclusionsIt is feasible for PC doctors to reach a consensus on a group of criteria that is perceived as valid for measuring quality of prescription and which includes certain impalpable values for determining quality.
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.