ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care
Evaluation of out-patient prescriptions in rural part of central Gujarat.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of a Teaching Module for Prescription Writing for Dental Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of dental education · 2025Trial
- Assessment of Prescription Writing Pattern in a Tertiary Care Center and Hospital at Vidisha Madhya Pradesh: A Prospective Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prescription error is a failure in the prescription writing process leading to wrong instructions about the identity of the recipient, the identity of the drug, the formulation, dose, route, timing, frequency, and duration of administration. This study is an effort directed to find errors in prescription writing and interventions to improve on such error-prone practices of prescription writing.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional, observational study conducted to analyze the prescription writing errors in the outpatient department in the rural area of Anand district of Central Gujarat. Prescriptions were collected from two nearby rural areas of Anand city-Petlad and Anklav. The prescription copies so-obtained were analyzed as per the WHO guidelines for "Prescription Writing Errors."
resultsOverall, 191 prescriptions were collected from both rural areas in the study. The highest number of prescriptions was collected from general practitioners, followed by surgeons and gynecologists. Name, qualification, and address of prescribers were mentioned in all the prescriptions while registration number was mentioned only in 14.10% of prescriptions. The esoteric symbol was mentioned in 63% of prescriptions. Prescribers signed their prescription only in 48% of prescriptions. A total of 420 drugs were prescribed to the patients in the study. All but one drug were prescribed by brand name. Dosage form and route of administration of drugs were mentioned in >60% of drugs.
conclusionMost medical schools provide some training in prescribing to medical undergraduates; however, this training is perceived to be suboptimal by medical students and junior doctors. Such training programs are the need of the hour.
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.