ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2006
Factor analysis improves the selection of prescribing indicators.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Quality of prescribing for hypertension and bronchial asthma at a tertiary health care facility, India using Prescription Quality Index tool.Journal of basic and clinical pharmacy · 2014Article
- Development and validation of a new Prescription Quality Index.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- Assessment of quality of prescribing in patients of hypertension at primary and secondary health care facilities using the Prescription Quality Index (PQI) tool.Indian journal of pharmacologyObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test a method for improving the selection of indicators of general practitioners' prescribing.
methodsWe conducted a prescription database study including all 180 general practices in the County of Funen, Denmark, approximately 472,000 inhabitants. Principal factor analysis was used to model correlation between 19 register-based indicators for the quality of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prescribing.
resultsThe correlation between indicators ranged widely from 0 to 0.93. Factor analysis revealed three dimensions of quality: (1) "Coxib preference", comprising indicators directly quantifying choice of coxibs, indicators measuring expenditure per Defined Daily Dose, and indicators taking risk aspects into account, (2) "Frequent NSAID prescribing", comprising indicators quantifying prevalence or amount of NSAID prescribing, and (3) "Diverse NSAID choice", comprising indicators focusing on the width of GPs' formularies. The number of indicators for measuring the important aspects of quality in prescribing of NSAIDs could be reduced substantially by selecting the indicator in each dimension with the highest factor loading. A high preference for coxibs indicated both appropriate and inappropriate prescribing, as revealed by the correlation of the indicators in the first factor.
conclusionCorrelation and factor analysis is a feasible method that assists the selection of indicators and gives better insight into prescribing patterns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17024487What 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.