ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1989
Prescribing costs when computers are used to issue all prescriptions.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1989. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Has general practitioner computing made a difference to patient care? A systematic review of published reports.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995Pooled it
- A randomized evaluation of a computer-based physician's workstation: design considerations and baseline results.Proceedings. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care · 1995Trial
- Pharmacoeconomic consequences of measurement and modification of hospital drug use.PharmacoEconomics · 1992Review
- A review of limited lists and formularies: are they cost-effective?PharmacoEconomics · 1992Article
- Development of an electronic prescription processing option: an aid for general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1991Article
- Prescribing research: PACT to the future.The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1989Article
- Case report: activity diagrams for integrating electronic prescribing tools into clinical workflow.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to see whether the use of a computer to issue prescriptions in conjunction with a computerised, customized drug formulary affects prescribing costs. Data on prescribing costs were obtained from the Scottish Prescription Pricing Bureau for 1978-87. A microcomputer system was introduced into the practice in 1983 and used initially to issue repeat prescriptions, but from 1985 onwards a new system was added to issue all prescriptions; a personal computerised drug formulary was developed in 1983. Personal prescribing costs before and after computerisation were compared with those of the other partners and those of the Lothian Health Board and Scotland combined. The prescribing costs of the partners and Lothian Health Board and Scotland combined increased almost linearly in line with inflation from 1978 to 1987. Personal prescribing costs increased steadily until 1983, when repeat prescriptions were issued by computer, and remained static for a year. Thereafter they increased steadily until 1985, when all prescriptions were issued by computer, and then showed a steady and sustained fall. Personal prescribing costs were 21.5% lower than those of the partners in 1986 and 29.5% lower in 1987. Prescribing costs were reduced when a computer was used to issue all prescriptions in conjunction with a personal, computerised formulary.
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.