ArticleAtencion primaria2004
[Working out a questionnaire to study the relationship between doctors and the drug industry].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2004. 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.
- [Analysis of the relationship between primary care doctors and the pharmaceutical industry].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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo work out and validate a questionnaire that can be self-filled and has closed answers to describe: 1) the kind of relationship between family doctors and the pharmaceutical industry; 2) the attitude of family doctors towards this relationship, and 3) the conduct of family doctors when faced with concrete offers from the industry.
designCross-sectional study.
participantsRepresentative sample of family doctors working in primary care teams in Aragon, stratified by province, rural or urban setting and sex. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: A questionnaire with closed answers that can be self-filled was worked out. It had 55 items on three scales. It was referred to a group of experts in methodology, administration, health law and Bioethics, for an appraisal of its contents, criteria and construction. It was then re-sent to three of them for appraisal of the stability of their scoring.
resultsThe questionnaire was valid in contents, criteria and construction. The results of the re-test sent to a part of the total sample gave information on replies' stability and served as a measurement of the reliability of the questionnaire.
conclusionsThe questionnaire worked out met established psychometric criteria. The analysis of its results after its distribution to a representative sample of Aragonese family doctors may contribute previously unknown information on their attitudes to the drug industry.
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.