ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2020
Prescription digitization, online preservation, and retrieval on a smartphone.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2020. 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.
- Reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing behaviour among dental practitioners in a south Indian City through an educational intervention- a mixed methods feasibility study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Co-Producing an Intervention to Reduce Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing Among Dental Practitioners in India.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators for the use of telehealth by healthcare providers in India-A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical records are important documents that should be stored for at least 3 years after the commencement of the treatment of an adult patient in India. In a health care facility, patients' data is saved in an online or offline retrieval system. However, in the case of the primary care physician, the data is not commonly kept in an easily retrievable system.
aimTo test the feasibility of using a set of free web-based services in digitization, preservation, and retrieval of prescription on a smartphone by primary care physicians.
methodsThis study was conducted with 12 primary care physicians. They were provided hands-on guides on creating an online form for uploading a prescription and using an application for retrieval of the prescription on a smartphone. Their feedback on the training material was collected by a telephonic survey, which had a 10-point Likert-type response option. Then, an in-depth interview was conducted to ascertain their perception on the tutorial and the process of digitization and retrieval system.
resultsAll of the participants were able to create an online form on their smartphone. They uploaded their prescription and associated data and were able to retrieve it. The physicians opined positively on the "cost of the system," "portability" on a smartphone and ease of the "tutorial". They opined negatively on the "limited storage," chances of "loss of data," and "time constraints" for entry of the patients' data.
conclusionFree web-based and smartphone applications can be used by a primary care physician for personal storage and retrieval of prescriptions. The simple tutorial presented in this article would help many primary care physicians in resource-limited settings.
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.