ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2005
General practitioners prefer prescribing indicators based on detailed information on individual patients: a Delphi study.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tolerability to paracetamol and preferential COX-2 inhibitors in patients with cross-reactive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs hypersensitivity.Asia Pacific allergy · 2020Article
- Prescriber variation in potentially inappropriate prescribing in older populations in Ireland.BMC family practice · 2014Article
- Effect of a workshop in rational pharmacotherapy for interns during family medicine clerkship in Samsun- Turkey.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2014Article
- Compliance with quality prescribing indicators in terms of their relationship to financial incentives.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Article
- A pilot qualitative study to explore stakeholder opinions regarding prescribing quality indicators.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- The Norwegian General Practice (NORGEP) criteria for assessing potentially inappropriate prescriptions to elderly patients. A modified Delphi study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2009Article
- Factor analysis improves the selection of prescribing indicators.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2006Article
- General practitioners' ranking of evidence-based prescribing quality indicators: a comparative study with a prescription database.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2006Article
- A cluster-randomized educational intervention to reduce inappropriate prescription patterns for elderly patients in general practice--The Prescription Peer Academic Detailing (Rx-PAD) study [NCT00281450].BMC health services research · 2006Article
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
objectiveTo assess the face validity of both simple and advanced quality indicators for prescribing in general practice.
methodsIn a three-round Delphi study, 100 randomly selected general practitioners (GPs) in Denmark rated 18 indicators for prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. All indicators were based on prescription register data and focused on different prescribing aspects. Advanced indicators contained information at the patient level, viz. age, sex and history of drug use, while simple indicators only used drug statistics at practice level. Indicators were rated on a nine-point Likert scale. Consensus among GPs was defined as interquartile ranges of three or less. A median rating of 7-9 was interpreted as face validity and a median rating of 1-3 as no face validity.
resultsParticipation in the study was accepted by 44 GPs and 37 completed all three rounds. Three indicators based on patient level data and focusing on adverse effects were assessed to have face value. One indicator focusing on costs and based on practice level data was considered unsuitable for evaluating the quality of prescribing. Consensus was not reached for the remaining indicators.
conclusionsGPs do not regard simple indicators based on aggregated data at practice level as suitable for evaluating the prescribing quality in general practice, but prefer indicators that rest on clinical data at the patient level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15864571What 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.