Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21042490›Full record

ArticleJournal of young pharmacists : JYP2010

Assessment of Awareness among Clinicians about Concepts in Undergraduate Pharmacology Curriculum: A Novel Cross-sectional Study.

R Mahajan, Nr Singh, J Singh, A Dixit, A Jain, A Gupta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of young pharmacists : JYP, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

R MahajanDepartment of Pharmacology, Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Bathinda - 151 109, India.
Nr Singh
J Singh
A Dixit
A Jain
A Gupta

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn the last 30 years, concepts in pharmacology have moved from Essential Medicines (EM) to P-drugs via the Rational Use of Medicines (RUM), but no structured study has evaluated the level of understanding among working clinicians about these concepts. The present study is designed to fulfill that lacuna. MATERIALS AND

methodsA cross-sectional study was carried out in and around the teaching hospitals attached to Medical Colleges, enrolling 504 clinicians from six centers across North India to fill-up a questionnaire containing 25 questions. The results were compiled using percentages and averages.

resultsOnly one-fourth of the participants claimed that they always prescribed Essential Medicines; no one could accurately count the number of drugs / drug combinations in the Indian Essential Drug list; only 15.1% of the clinicians used to write the generic names of drugs on a prescription slip; about one-third of the clinicians were not fully aware about the adverse effects, drug interactions, and contraindications of the drugs they prescribed; about 83% of the physicians admitted to rely on information from Medical Representatives (MRs) and the interest in research activities seemed to be lost.

conclusionResults show a sorry state of affairs among clinicians, as far as the level of understanding about EM, P-drugs, and RUM is concerned, and points toward arranging more continuing medical education (CME) for clinicians regarding these concepts.

Indexed as

Cliniciansessential medicinesP-drugsrational use of medicines

Identifiers

PMID21042490
PMCPMC2964763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.