Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27798010›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Why do general practitioners prescribe antibiotics for upper respiratory tract infections to meet patient expectations: a mixed methods study.

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

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 117 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
117citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
12.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

117 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 221 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Rational Antibiotic Use in Office Practice.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

57 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Stephanie Fletcher-LarteyPopulation Health, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.
Melissa YeeEvaluation, NPS MedicineWise, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Christina GaarslevOslo kommune Helseetaten, Oslo, Norway.
Rabia KhanCentre for Primary Health Care and Equity, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Healthwise · USOslo Kommune · NOPrimary Health Care · QASouth Western Sydney Local Health District · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the role patient expectations play in general practitioners (GPs) antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections (URTI).

methodsConcurrent explanatory mixed methods approach using a cross-sectional survey and semistructured interviews. SETTINGS: Primary care GPs in Australia.

participants584 GPs (response rate of 23.6%) completed the cross-sectional survey. 32 GPs were interviewed individually. OUTCOME MEASURE: Prescribing of antibiotics for URTI.

resultsMore than half the GP respondents to the survey in Australia self-reported that they would prescribe antibiotics for an URTI to meet patient expectations. Our qualitative findings suggest that 'patient expectations' may be the main reason given for inappropriate prescribing, but it is an all-encompassing phrase that includes other reasons. These include limited time, poor doctor-patient communication and diagnostic uncertainty. We have identified three role archetypes to explain the behaviour of GPs in reference to antibiotic prescribing for URTIs. The main themes emerging from the qualitative component was that many GPs did not think that antibiotic prescribing in primary care was responsible for the development of antibiotic resistance nor that their individual prescribing would make any difference in light of other bigger issues like hospital prescribing or veterinary use. For them, there were negligible negative consequences from their inappropriate prescribing.

conclusionsThere is a need to increase awareness of the scope and magnitude of antibiotic resistance and the role primary care prescribing plays, and of the contribution of individual prescribing decisions to the problem of antibiotic resistance.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PractitionersInappropriate PrescribingPhysician-Patient RelationsPractice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsAustraliaClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesDrug Resistance, MicrobialFamily PracticeFemaleHumansMaleAnti-Bacterial Agentsantibioticsinappropriate prescribingPRIMARY CAREupper respiratory tract infection

Identifiers

PMID27798010
PMCPMC5093394
OpenAlexW2531949064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.