Evidence map›Paper›PMID 2031739›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1991

Use of regression analysis to explain the variation in prescribing rates and costs between family practitioner committees.

D P Forster, C E Frost

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1991. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Visualizing nationwide variation in medicare Part D prescribing patterns.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Morbidity, deprivation, and antidepressant prescribing in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1999
    Article
  8. A comparison of three methods of setting prescribing budgets, using data derived from defined daily dose analyses of historic patterns of use.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1998
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Using unemployment rates to predict prescribing trends in England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1994
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Prescribing costs in dispensing practices.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1993
    Article
  18. Towards accurate prescribing analysis in general practice: accounting for the effects of practice demography.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1993
    Article
  19. Rethinking medical audit: the goal is efficiency.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 1992
    Review
  20. FHSA medical advisers: friends or foes?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1992
    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

2 authors.

D P ForsterUniversity of Newcastle Medical School.
C E Frost

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are proposals to set up prescribing budgets for family practitioner committees (now family health services authorities) and indicative prescribing amounts for practices. An intelligible model is therefore required for specifying budgetary allocations. Regression analyses were used to explain the variation in prescription rates and costs between the 98 family practitioner committees of England and Wales in 1987. Fifty one per cent of the variation in prescription rates and 44% of the variation in prescription costs per patient could be explained by variations in the age-sex structure of family practitioner committees. The standardized mortality ratio for all causes and patients in 1987, and the number of general practice principals per 1000 population in 1987, but not the Jarman under-privileged area score were found to improve the predictive power of the regression models significantly (P less than 0.01). The predictions of the model for the 10 family practitioner committees with the highest and lowest prescription rates or costs are reported and discussed. Potential improvements in models of prescribing behaviour may be thwarted by two problems. First, the paucity of readily available data on health care need at family practitioner committee and practice levels, and secondly, the increasing complexity in the statistical techniques required may render the procedure less intelligible, meaningful and negotiable in a contentious field.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisDrug PrescriptionsDrug UtilizationEnglandFamily PracticePractice Patterns, Physicians'Regression AnalysisState MedicineWales

Identifiers

PMID2031739
PMCPMC1371554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.