Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27777760›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2016

A mixed methods study to understand patient expectations for antibiotics for an upper respiratory tract infection.

Christina Gaarslev, Melissa Yee, Georgi Chan, Stephanie Fletcher-Lartey, Rabia Khan

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. How health systems build capacity for antimicrobial stewardship: eight pillars to success.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Christina GaarslevOslo kommune Helseetaten, Oslo, 0182 Norway.
Melissa YeeNPS MedicineWise, Evaluation, Sydney, NSW 2010 Australia.
Georgi ChanBlue Planet research and consulting, 8 highland Crescent, Earlwood, Australia.
Stephanie Fletcher-LarteySouth Western Sydney Local Health District, Population Health, Liverpool, NSW 2170 Australia.
Rabia KhanUniversity of New South Wales, Centre for Primary Health Care and Equity, Level 3, AGSM Building, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia.
Oslo Kommune · NOSouth Western Sydney Local Health District · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntimicrobial resistance is a public health challenge supplemented by inappropriate prescribing, especially for an upper respiratory tract infection in primary care. Patient/carer expectations have been identified as one of the main drivers for inappropriate antibiotics prescribing by primary care physicians. The aim of this study was to understand who is more likely to expect an antibiotic for an upper respiratory tract infection from their doctor and the reasons underlying it.

methodsThis study used a sequential mixed methods approach: a nationally representative cross sectional survey (

resultsThe study found 19.5 % of survey respondents reported that they would expect the doctor to prescribe antibiotics for a cold or flu. People younger than 65 years of age, those who never attended university and those speaking a language other than English at home were more likely to expect or demand antibiotics for a cold or flu. People who knew that 'antibiotics don't kill viruses' and agreed that 'taking an antibiotic when one is not needed means they won't work in the future' were less likely to expect or demand antibiotics. The main reasons for expecting antibiotics were believing that antibiotics are an effective treatment for a cold or flu and that they shortened the duration and potential deterioration of their illness. The secondary reason centered around the value or return on investment for visiting a doctor when feeling unwell.

conclusionOur study found that patients do not appear to feel they have a sufficiently strong incentive to consider the impact of their immediate use of antibiotics on antimicrobial resistance. The issue of antibiotic resistance needs to be explained and reframed as a more immediate health issue with dire consequences to ensure the success of future health campaigns.

Indexed as

AntibioticsInappropriate prescribingPrimary careUpper respiratory tract infection

Identifiers

PMID27777760
PMCPMC5072313
OpenAlexW2534224271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.