ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2012
An Australian perspective.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Discussing the future of UK clinical pharmacology, eight Australasian clinical pharmacologists emphasized the need to make the discipline 'indispensable' in key areas. The visibility of clinical pharmacology in Australasia has been improved by working with the Consumers' Health Forum in Australia in the construction of the national Policy on Quality Use of Medicines and, later, of the formal National Medicines Policy. Our expertise in clinical pharmacology, combined with the Health Forum's political skills, proved a potent force for launching these policies. A second example was the construction of the national prescribing curriculum in partnership with the National Prescribing Service. This is being used in all medical schools with senior students. At a local level we found that taking over clinical toxicology services (that other clinicians wanted to jettison) provided a stimulus to clinical research and later the formation of a productive subgroup to study the special problems of envenomation. Fourthly, we note that no clinical pharmacology unit in UK is designated as a WHO collaborating centre. Considerable difference can be made to national problems with medicines by clinical pharmacologists willing to work for periods within developing countries. This has given a greater profile to several groups in Australia. The principle of stepping out of conventional settings and actively seeking collaboration with other groups beyond our discipline has enhanced the profile of the discipline in Australasia and could do the same in the UK.
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.