Trial reportBMC clinical pharmacology2007
Influence of an e-mail with a drug information attachment on sales of prescribed drugs: a randomized controlled study.
Trial report in BMC clinical pharmacology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Underreporting in pharmacovigilance: an intervention for Italian GPs (Emilia-Romagna region).European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Article
- Characteristics of primary health care units with focus on drug information from the pharmaceutical industry and adherence to prescribing objectives: a cross-sectional study.BMC clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- Effects of e-mails containing ADR information and a current case report on ADR reporting rate and quality of reports.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2009Article
- Use of and attitudes towards the prescribing guidelines booklet in primary health care doctors.BMC clinical pharmacology · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo provide doctors with producer-independent information to facilitate choice of treatment is an important task. The objective of the present study was to evaluate if an e-mail with a drug information attachment has effects on sales of prescribed drugs and if the design of the attachment is of importance.
methodsThe Swedish pharmaceutical benefit board found rizatriptan (Maxalt) 10 mg to be the most cost-effective triptan. All 119 heads of primary care units in western Sweden were randomized to receive information concerning this conclusion via (i) e-mail with attachment I, (ii) e-mail with attachment II or (iii) no information (control). Attachment I was a short one (heading plus three lines text), whereas attachment II was a long one (heading plus one page text and one page with tables). The change in percentage rizatriptan of total triptans sold before and after the intervention (May - July 2004 and May - July 2005, respectively) was compared between the groups.
resultsTotally 48,229 (2004) and 50,674 (2005) defined daily doses of triptans were prescribed and sold during May - July in primary care units in the western part of Sweden. The absolute change in percentage rizatriptan was greater in the intervention groups compared with the control group 2 (25th - 75th percentile: -3 - 7) vs 0 (-7 - 5), P = 0.031). The absolute change in percentage rizatriptan did not differ between the two attachment groups (P = 0.93).
conclusionAn e-mail with a drug information attachment may influence sales of prescribed drugs. No difference between different designs of the attachment could be detected.
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.