ArticlePloS one2017
Characterizing the interaction between physicians, pharmacists and pharmaceutical representatives in a middle-income country: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Doctors taking bribes from pharmaceutical companies is common and not substantially reduced by an educational intervention: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in Pakistan.BMJ global health · 2025Trial
- Expectations Shaped Elsewhere: Refugee Experiences of Healthcare in Aotearoa New Zealand.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- The attitude and acceptability towards medical promotional tools and their influence on physicians' prescribing practices in Jordan and Iraq: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Conflict of Interest: Are Iranian Breast Cancer Specialists Prone to it?Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Implementation challenges for an ethical introduction of noninvasive prenatal testing: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' views from Lebanon and Quebec.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Article
- Pharmaceutical marketing strategies' influence on physicians' prescribing pattern in Lebanon: ethics, gifts, and samples.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Knowing antmicrobial resistance in practice: a multi-country qualitative study with human and animal healthcare professionals.Global health action · 2019Article
- A Call to Action to Transform Pharmacy Education and Practice in the Arab World.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies around the world have shown that interactions between pharmaceutical companies, pharmacists and physicians have a great influence on prescribing and drug dispensing practices. In middle-income countries, the nature and extent of these interactions have not been well researched. Our objectives were to qualitatively explore the nature of the interactions between pharmaceutical companies, physicians and pharmacists, their impact on drug prescription and dispensing practices in Lebanon. METHODS AND
findingsWe used grounded theory approach as well as the known sponsor, purposive, and snowballing sampling strategies to identify interviewees from the three respective groups: physicians, pharmacists, and pharmaceutical representatives. We conducted semi-structured and analyzed transcripts thematically. This study encompassed 6 pharmaceutical representatives, 13 physicians and 13 pharmacists. The following themes emerged: purpose and driver for the interactions, nature of the interactions, incentives, impact on prescription practices, ethical considerations, and suggestions for managing the interactions. The main purposes for the interaction were educational, promotional, and monitoring prescription practices and dispensing, while the main drivers for these interactions were market potential and neighborhood socio-economic status. Physicians, pharmacists and pharmaceutical representatives who engage in these interactions benefit from a variety of incentives, some of which were characterized as unethical. It appears that pharmaceutical companies give prominence to selected physicians within their communities. Although members of the three interviewed groups refer to some of the interactions as being problematic, they described a culture of acceptance of gift giving. We developed a framework that depicts the prevailing politico-cultural environment, the interactions between the three professional groups, and their impact on drug prescription. Underreporting is the main limitation of this study.
conclusionInteractions between physicians, pharmacists and pharmaceutical representatives are frequent. Although these interactions can be beneficial, they still have a substantial effect on drug prescription and dispensing practices. Hence, the need for new policies that regulate these interactions and penalize any misconduct.
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.