ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2021
Post-Visit Patient Understanding About Newly Prescribed Medications.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A qualitative study of perceptions of the care pathway for familial hypercholesterolemia: screening, diagnosis, treatment, and family cascade screening.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Observational
- Large Language Models and Medical Education: Preparing for a Rapid Transformation in How Trainees Will Learn to Be Doctors.ATS scholar · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGood patient understanding of basic medication-related information such as directions for use and side effects promotes medication adherence, but information is lacking about how well patients understand basic medication-related information after their office visits.
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to investigate post-visit patient understanding about newly prescribed medications.
designSecondary mixed methods analysis comparing patient survey responses about newly prescribed medications to information conveyed by physicians during office visits (from audio recordings of office visits).
participantsEighty-one patients aged 50 and older who discussed newly prescribed medications during an outpatient office visit. MAIN MEASURES: Accurate patient identification of medication dose, number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and potential side effects. KEY
resultsThe 81 patients in this study received 111 newly prescribed medications. For over 70% of all newly prescribed medications, patients correctly identified the number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and dose, regardless of whether the physician mentioned the information during the office visit. However, for 34 of 62 medications (55%) for which side effects were not conveyed and 11 of 49 medications (22%) for which physicians discussed side effects, patients reported that the medication lacked side effects. Analysis of transcribed office visits showed that potential reasons for this finding included failure of physicians to mention or to use the term "side effects" during visits, the prescription of multiple medications during the visit, and lack of patient engagement in the conversation.
conclusionsMany patients correctly identified information related to directions for taking a newly prescribed medication, even without physician counseling, but when physicians failed to convey potential medication side effects, many assumed that a medication had no side effects. It may be sufficient for physicians to provide written information about medication directions and dosing, and tailor their limited time to discussing medication side effects.
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.