ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Patient Perceptions of Electronic Prescriptions in Belgium: An Exploratory Policy Analysis.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients' Satisfaction with E-Prescribing (Wasfaty) in Saudi Arabia: A Survey of Country-Level Implementation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Survey of Patients' Opinions and Preferences on the Use of E-Prescriptions in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- E-prescribing and access to prescription medicines during lockdown: experience of patients in Aotearoa/New Zealand.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Minimizing Medication Errors from Electronic Prescription Transmission-Digitizing Compounded Drug Preparations.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Why do Belgian Community Pharmacists Still Treat Electronic Prescriptions as Paper-Based?Journal of medical systems · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In today's world, digitalization and automation are ubiquitous and different countries have different strategies for implementing information technology in health care. In Belgium, these plans include the dematerialization of prescriptions, following the implementation of a system of electronic prescribing. In the light of these changes, we studied the attitudes of patients toward a paperless prescription. We collected the opinions of 273 patients by survey. Older people, or people with more complex medical needs, expressed a clear desire to keep receiving a paper version of the prescription. Younger people foresaw practical advantages, and expressed a willingness to buy prescription-only medicines online. Knowledge about the planned changes was, however, limited. Privacy and autonomy issues were expressed by a large fraction of people. The problem of what happens when a third person wants to pick up medicines for a patient, a frequent occurrence, was often mentioned. We conclude that, at present, patients have inadequate knowledge and understanding about the planned changes. In light of these considerations and the recent technical problems encountered by the system, we feel that an updated risk/benefit analysis of the planned policy is urgently needed.
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.