ArticleIrish journal of medical science2017
Medicines containing codeine: perspectives of medical professionals in the Republic of Ireland.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Suspected inappropriate use of prescription and non-prescription drugs among requesting customers: A Saudi community pharmacists' perspective.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023Article
- Sales of Over-the-Counter Products Containing Codeine in 31 Countries, 2013-2019: A Retrospective Observational Study.Drug safety · 2022Observational
- A mixed-methods systematic review of the prevalence, reasons, associated harms and risk-reduction interventions of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines misuse, abuse and dependence in adults.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2021Review
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe aim of the study was to examine prescribing professional's perceptions on prescribed and OTC medicines, containing codeine in the Republic of Ireland. A secondary aim was to examine perceptions on codeine dependence, screening and treatment.
methodsA cross-sectional study of a nationally representative group of prescribing professionals was conducted using a questionnaire containing a number of open and closed ended items. Data were analysed using SPSS version 21 and content analysis techniques.
results398 medical professionals participated in the study giving a response rate of 18%. 77% of respondents agreed to routinely review patient prescribed codeine. 59% of respondents routinely asked patients about their use of OTC medicines and 50% documented use of OTC codeine in their patients' medical notes. 93% indicated concern about the potential to purchase codeine from multiple sources. 88% implied that patients did not fully understand the risks of taking OTC medicine containing codeine. Only 21% of respondents were confident in identifying codeine dependence without being informed by the patient and 11.4% agreed to have suitable screening methods in practice. 76% indicated that they would like more instruction on prescribing addictive medicines.
conclusionPolicy should examine the need for greater public health awareness on codeine use and should examine the role of OTC and internet sales in the development of dependence. Further consideration should be given to training and support for those who prescribe addictive medicines in practice.
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.