SynthesisPLoS medicine2007
Physician awareness of drug cost: a systematic review.
Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
97 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Competition and price among brand-name drugs in the same class: A systematic review of the evidence.PLoS medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Effectiveness of provider price display in computerized physician order entry (CPOE) on healthcare quality: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Pooled it
- Guideline
- Do randomized controlled trials discuss healthcare costs?PloS one · 2010Pooled it
- Medical oncologists' willingness to participate in bundled payment programs.BMC health services research · 2018Trial
- What is in your wallet? A cluster randomized trial of the effects of showing comparative patient out-of-pocket costs on primary care prescribing for uncomplicated hypertension.Implementation science : IS · 2018Trial
- Article
- Is There Any Difference in Preferences Between Patients and Physicians? Evidence From Anti-Hyperglycemic Medications Choices for Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of diabetes · 2026Article
- Variations in the perceived value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics based on physicians' clinical backgrounds.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cost Consideration for the Treatment of Peyronie's Disease: A Narrative Review.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Factors influencing cost awareness in hospitals: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Primary care physicians prescribe fewer expensive combination medications than dermatologists for acne: A retrospective review.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Spending and Utilization for Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps Therapies Among Commercially Insured Beneficiaries.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Patient out-of-pocket costs for guideline-recommended treatments for erectile dysfunction: a medicare cost modeling analysis.International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Medicine affordability and access in India: lessons from generic-branded price variation under the Jan Aushadhi Scheme.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
- Response to Comment on: Patient out-of-pocket costs for guideline-recommended treatments for erectile dysfunction: a medicare cost modeling analysis.International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Cost awareness among intensivists in their daily clinical practice: a prospective multicentre study.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Observational
- Article
- Gamification of emergency medicine cost awareness education.AEM education and training · 2024Article
- A Cross-Sectional Survey of Fixed-Dose Combination Antihypertensive Medicine Prescribing in Twenty-Four Countries, Including Qualitative Insights.Global heart · 2024Article
37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
backgroundPharmaceutical costs are the fastest-growing health-care expense in most developed countries. Higher drug costs have been shown to negatively impact patient outcomes. Studies suggest that doctors have a poor understanding of pharmaceutical costs, but the data are variable and there is no consistent pattern in awareness. We designed this systematic review to investigate doctors' knowledge of the relative and absolute costs of medications and to determine the factors that influence awareness. METHODS AND
findingsOur search strategy included The Cochrane Library, EconoLit, EMBASE, and MEDLINE as well as reference lists and contact with authors who had published two or more articles on the topic or who had published within 10 y of the commencement of our review. Studies were included if: either doctors, trainees (interns or residents), or medical students were surveyed; there were more than ten survey respondents; cost of pharmaceuticals was estimated; results were expressed quantitatively; there was a clear description of how authors defined "accurate estimates"; and there was a description of how the true cost was determined. Two authors reviewed each article for eligibility and extracted data independently. Cost accuracy outcomes were summarized, but data were not combined in meta-analysis because of extensive heterogeneity. Qualitative data related to physicians and drug costs were also extracted. The final analysis included 24 articles. Cost accuracy was low; 31% of estimates were within 20% or 25% of the true cost, and fewer than 50% were accurate by any definition of cost accuracy. Methodological weaknesses were common, and studies of low methodological quality showed better cost awareness. The most important factor influencing the pattern and accuracy of estimation was the true cost of therapy. High-cost drugs were estimated more accurately than inexpensive ones (74% versus 31%, Chi-square p < 0.001). Doctors consistently overestimated the cost of inexpensive products and underestimated the cost of expensive ones (binomial test, 89/101, p < 0.001). When asked, doctors indicated that they want cost information and feel it would improve their prescribing but that it is not accessible.
conclusionsDoctors' ignorance of costs, combined with their tendency to underestimate the price of expensive drugs and overestimate the price of inexpensive ones, demonstrate a lack of appreciation of the large difference in cost between inexpensive and expensive drugs. This discrepancy in turn could have profound implications for overall drug expenditures. Much more focus is required in the education of physicians about costs and the access to cost information. Future research should focus on the accessibility and reliability of medical cost information and whether the provision of this information is used by doctors and makes a difference to physician prescribing. Additionally, future work should strive for higher methodological standards to avoid the biases we found in the current literature, including attention to the method of assessing accuracy that allows larger absolute estimation ranges for expensive drugs.
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.