Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2004
Patterns of psychotropic medicine use and related diseases across educational groups: national cross-sectional survey.
Trial report in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Associations between Healthcare Use and Demographics, Pain and Pain Cognitions in People Scheduled for Surgery for Lumbar Radiculopathy: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- An examination of the medicalization and pharmaceuticalization processes of anxiety and depressive disorders in Belgium between 2004 and 2013: how may both disorders be intertwined?Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2022Article
- Article
- Prevalence of and factors related to the use of antidepressants and benzodiazepines: results from the Singapore Mental Health Study.BMC psychiatry · 2013Article
- Self-medication behaviors among Japanese consumers: sex, age, and SES differences and caregivers' attitudes toward their children's health management.Asia Pacific family medicine · 2012Article
- Estimation of psycholeptic and psychoanaleptic medicine use in an adult general population sample using the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse whether the use of different groups of psychotropic medicines among educational groups in a general population was congruent with the occurrence of related diseases.
methodsData from The Danish Health and Morbidity Survey 2000 were analysed. The survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews with a representative sample of the Danish population aged 16 years and above ( n=16,690). The prevalence of four different types of psychotropic medicine use and related diseases in educational groups was analysed by indirect standardisation. Age and gender standardised prevalence ratios (SPRs) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated based on the total study population.
resultsIn general, respondents in the two least-educated groups used psychotropic medicines more often and had a higher proportion reporting the related disease than could be expected according to indirect standardisation. The opposite picture appeared for respondents in the two highest educated groups (SPR<100). The overall patterns were similar for all four groups of psychotropic medicine users, although some of the SPRs were not significant.
conclusionsThe results documented an uneven distribution of health problems in the general population. Psychotropic medicine use was congruent with the distribution of related health problems, which means that the least-educated groups in most need of treatment also had the most-frequent medicine use. Expenses incurred by the individual user did not seem to be a barrier to access to medicines, not even for specific groups of medicine ineligible for reimbursement in Denmark.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15024533What 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.