ArticleBJGP open2020
Patients' and health professionals' attitudes and perceptions towards the initiation of preventive drugs for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review of qualitative studies.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A conceptual model of factors potentially influencing prescribing decisions for chronic conditions: an overview of systematic reviews.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A Cross-Sectional Survey of Fixed-Dose Combination Antihypertensive Medicine Prescribing in Twenty-Four Countries, Including Qualitative Insights.Global heart · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStatins and antihypertensive agents are recommended for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but they are not always prescribed to eligible patients. DESIGN &
settingA systematic review of qualitative studies.
aimTo explore health professionals' and patients' attitudes towards cardiovascular preventive drugs.
methodMEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, ASSIA, HMIC, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and Open Grey were searched for studies of qualitative design without restrictions on date or language. Two reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and thematic synthesis.
resultsIn total, 2585 titles and abstracts were screened, yielding 27 studies, of which five met eligibility criteria on full text assessment. These included 62 patients and 47 health professionals. Five themes emerged about patient attitudes: questioning preventive drugs; perceived benefit and risks, such as improving quality of life; patient preferences; trust in health professional judgement; and family, friends, and media influences. Five themes emerged about health professional attitudes: addressing patient concerns and information; duty as a health professional to prescribe; uncertainty about preventive drug prescribing; recognising consequences of prescribing, such as unnecessary medicalisation; and personalised treatment.
conclusionThe attitudes of patients and health professionals regarding drug initiation for primary prevention reflect the complexity of the patient-health professional encounter in primary practice. For prescribing to be more adherent to guidelines, research should further investigate the patient-health professional relationship and the appropriate communication methods required when discussing drug initiation, specifically for primary prevention.
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.