ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
Physician's knowledge, attitude and practice of fixed drug combinations: Can we recognize the lacunae?
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Acceptability of fixed-dose combination treatments for hypertension in Kenya: A qualitative study using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Assessment of Potential Drug-drug Interactions (pDDIs) and Their Risk Factors Among Hospitalized Cardiac Patients in a Tertiary-care Center of Central India: A Retrospective Record-based Study.Hospital pharmacy · 2024Article
- Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice of fixed-dose combinations amongst attending physicians and residents: a cross-sectional evaluation.Drugs in context · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Indian pharmaceutical market is flooded with different fixed drug combinations (FDCs), many of which lack a rational justification. The study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding FDCs among the physicians of a tertiary-care teaching center. Method: The target sample size for this cross-sectional study was calculated as 75, and the study was conducted between February and August 2020 by using a content-validated questionnaire. Descriptive statistics had been utilized for data analysis, and Chi-square test had been applied for intergroup comparison (with Results: The mean age of the physicians who participated in this survey was 33.2 years. While 44% of them could identify all the potential advantages of using FDCs, only 09% could correctly recognize all the disadvantages associated with the same. Among the list of rational and irrational FDCs, only 49% could single out the irrational ones. And though the majority (83%) of the respondents do check for the rationality of FDCs before prescribing them, still out of 25 most commonly prescribed FDCs, 16 lacked any scientific justification for combination, and 09 (out of 16) had been banned by the Government of India. Conclusion: The outcome of this cross-sectional questionnaire-based study reflects the deficit in the knowledge regarding FDCs, as well as incoherence among the knowledge, attitude, and prescription practice. Though the physicians have cultivated a healthy attitude towards prescribing FDCs, the same is not reflected in their practice. In order to rectify these disparities, the authors have proposed certain recommendations within this article.
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.