ArticleJournal of research in pharmacy practice
Attachment to stress ulcer prophylaxis guideline in the neurology wards of two teaching and non-teaching hospitals: A retrospective survey in Iran.
Article in Journal of research in pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Evaluation of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Use Among Adult Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit in Northwest Ethiopia Hospitals During 2024: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Assessment of pharmacologic prophylaxis use against stress ulcer in the medical wards of University of Gondar Hospital.SAGE open medicine · 2019Article
- Variables Associated with Adherence to Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Patients Admitted to the General Hospital Wards: A Prospective Study.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2017Article
- Appropriateness of Acid-suppressing Agents for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Non-intensive Care Unit Setting in Saudi Arabia.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to evaluate the attachment to stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) guideline in the neurology wards of two teaching and nonteaching hospitals.
methodsA total of 243 patients were retrospectively reviewed in the neurology wards of two teaching and nonteaching hospitals. To assess the appropriate administration of SUP, an internal guideline was prepared using the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) protocol.
findingsSUP prescriptions were noncompliant with ASHP guideline in about 93.1% and 84.6% of cases in the nonteaching and teaching hospitals, respectively.
conclusionSUP may be better practiced in teaching hospitals versus nonteaching ones.
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.