Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19370575›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Written information about individual medicines for consumers.

Donald Nicolson, Peter Knapp, D K Theo Raynor, Pat Spoor

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02246361 (Impact of Six Patient Information Leaflets), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02246361 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Six Patient Information Leaflets (PIL) on Doctor Patient Communication and Adherence in Emergency Ward

TypeinterventionalSponsorFloralisRan2014 to 2015Enrolled211ConditionsAnkle Sprain, Infectious Colitis, Diverticulitis, PyelonephritisArmsPatient Information Leaflet (PIL)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. How best to use and evaluate Patient Information Leaflets given during a consultation: a systematic review of literature reviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Communication and patient participation influencing patient recall of treatment discussions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Shared Decision-Making Tool for Treatment of Perinatal Opioid Use Disorder.Psychiatric research and clinical practice · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Patients' attitudes towards patient involvement in safety interventions: results of two exploratory studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Donald NicolsonSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK, LS2 9LN.
Peter Knapp
D K Theo Raynor
Pat Spoor

Funding

Department of Health 03/44/06
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedicines are the most common intervention in most health services. As with all treatments, those taking medicines need sufficient information: to enable them to take and use the medicines effectively, to understand the potential harms and benefits, and to allow them to make an informed decision about taking them. Written medicines information, such as a leaflet or provided via the Internet, is an intervention that may meet these purposes.

objectivesTo assess the effects of providing written information about individual medicines on relevant patient outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and health outcomes) in relation to prescribed and over-the-counter medicines. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and other databases to March 2007. We handsearched five journals' tables of contents, and the reference lists of included studies, and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of medicine users, comparing written medicines information with no written medicines information; or trials that compared two or more styles of written medicines information. We only included trials that measured a knowledge, attitudinal or behavioural outcome. There were no language restrictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data relating to the interventions, methods of the trials, and outcome measures; and reconciled differences by discussion. Heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes measured meant that data synthesis was not possible. The results are presented in narrative and tabular format. MAIN

resultsWe included 25 RCTs involving 4788 participants. Six of twelve trials showed that written information significantly improved knowledge about a medicine, compared with no written information. The inability to combine results means we cannot conclude whether written information was effective for increasing knowledge. The results for attitudinal and behavioural outcomes were mixed. No studies showed an adverse effect of medicines information. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe combined evidence was not strong enough to say whether written medicines information is effective in changing knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to medicine taking. There is some evidence that written information can improve knowledge. The trials were generally of poor quality, which reduces confidence in the results. Trials examining the effects of written information need to be better designed and use consistent and validated outcome measures. Trials should evaluate internet-based medicines information. It is imperative that written medicines information be based on best practice for its information design and content, which could improve its effectiveness in helping people to use medicines appropriately.

Indexed as

Drug LabelingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeNonprescription DrugsPrescription DrugsHumansPatient Education as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicNonprescription DrugsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID19370575
PMCPMC6483695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.