ArticlePloS one2015
Prescribing Generic Medication in Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Patients: An Issue of Representations, Trust, and Experience in a Swiss Cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nocebo in Biosimilars and Generics in Neurology: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Pooled it
- Generic-reference and generic-generic bioequivalence of forty-two, randomly-selected, on-market generic products of fourteen immediate-release oral drugs.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2017Trial
- Does the placebo effect modulate drug bioavailability? Randomized cross-over studies of three drugs.Journal of negative results in biomedicine · 2017Trial
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Key Consideration for Evaluating Biosimilar Uptake?Patient related outcome measures · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveParallel to an ever stronger advocacy for the use of generics, various sources of information report concerns regarding substitution. The literature indicates that information regarding substitution is not univocal. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore patients' representations regarding generics in patients suffering from non-specific disabling chronic musculoskeletal pain, as these patients are confronted with the issue of the prescription and/or substitution of original formulations with generics.
methodsQualitative methods were selected because the aim was to access the range of patients' representations and to consider their conceptions. Standardized face-to-face semi-structured interviews were used, and transcripts were submitted to content analysis.
resultsPatients' representations suggest that they might be confident in taking a generic medication: when he/she has an understanding of generics as resulting from a development process that has become part of the public domain; the generic medication is prescribed by the physician; each prescription is discussed, i.e., the patient is prescribed the generic version of a given medication and not a generic medication. DISCUSSION: Economic arguments are not sufficient to justify substitution, and may even raise issues calling upon cognitive dissonance. Even in non-life-threatening diseases, negative cues require attention and need be de-emphasized - in particular lower price as an indication of lower quality, and generic status as contradictory with advocating individualization of medication.
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.