ArticlePloS one2014
Effect of publicly reporting performance data of medicine use on injection use: a quasi-experimental study.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mechanisms and impact of public reporting on physicians and hospitals' performance: A systematic review (2000-2020).PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of public release of performance data on the behaviour of healthcare consumers and providers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC health services research · 2016Pooled it
- Public reporting as a prescriptions quality improvement measure in primary care settings in China: variations in effects associated with diagnoses.Scientific reports · 2016Trial
- Does public reporting influence antibiotic and injection prescribing to all patients? A cluster-randomized matched-pair trial in china.Medicine · 2016Trial
- The Contingent Payoff of Transparency: The Mediating Roles of Citizen Participation and Enforcement in Health Service Delivery Improvement.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Review
- Effects of public reporting of prescription indicators on patient choices: evidence from propensity scores matching.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Public Performance Metrics: Driving Physician Motivation and Performance.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2020Article
- General practitioners' perceptions of public reporting of institution and individual medicine prescribing data.BMC health services research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInappropriate use of prescribing pharmaceuticals, particularly injections, not only affects the quality of medical care, but also leads to an increase in medical expenses. Publicly reporting performance data of medical care is becoming a common health policy tool adopted to supervise medical quality. To our knowledge, few studies about public reporting applied to medicine use have been reported. This study intended to introduce public reporting in the field of medicine use, and evaluate the effect of publicly reporting performance data of medicine use on the use of injections.
methodsThe research sites were 20 primary healthcare institutions in Q City, Hubei. By matching, the institutions were divided into the intervention group and control group. A quasi-experimental design was applied in this study. In the intervention group, the performance data of medicine use were publicly reported. The injection prescribing rates of the two groups before and after intervention were measured and compared. Difference-in-difference method and logistic regression were employed to estimate the effect of public reporting on injection use.
resultsPublic reporting led to a reduction of approximately 4% in the injection prescribing rate four months after intervention (OR = 0.96; 95%CI: 0.94, 0.97). The intervention effect was inconsistent in each month after intervention, and it was most positive in the second month after intervention (OR = 0.90; 95%CI: 0.89, 0.92).
conclusionsIn general, publicly reporting performance data of medicine use may have positive effects on injection use to some extent. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanism by which public reporting influences injection use. Comprehensive measures are also necessary to promote the rational use of injections.
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.