ArticleBioinformation2022
Assessment of WHO core drug use indicators at a tertiary care Institute of National importance in India.
Article in Bioinformation, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prescription Analysis in the Digital Era: Comparing Artificial Intelligence-Based Versus Manual Approaches.Cureus · 2026Article
- Evaluation of prescribing pattern with special reference to antibiotics, using digital platform among inpatients in a tertiary care hospital.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2026Observational
- Digital platform for prescription analytics and antibiotic surveillance in an outpatient department setup.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2025Observational
- Implementing pharmacogenetic testing to optimize proton-pump inhibitors use among Indian population based on CPIC-CYP2C19-PPI dosing guidelines: The need of the hour.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rational prescribing of medicines is an important aspect of drug prescribing which helps in safe and efficacious and cost-effective drug treatment for patients. WHO Prescription indicators are intended to evaluate the services provided to the population concerning the rational use of medicines. The study aims to study prescription practices and rational use of medicines in the department of Internal medicine, using WHO prescribing indicators in a tertiary care teaching institute of national importance. A total of 50 prescriptions were digitally photographed and analysed for prescription practices and rational drug use, using standard WHO core prescribing indicators. A total of 301 drugs with multiple and diverse diagnoses were used. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 22 version. The average number of drugs per prescription was 3.48%. It was found that only 13.79% of prescriptions have generic names, whereas 27.58% of patient encounters had at least one drug from the National List of Essential Medicine, 6.8% of prescriptions have antibiotics and 0.7% of prescriptions were injections. The number of prescriptions with fixed drug combinations was 27.55%. Indicators such as percentage of the National List of Essential Medicine, fixed drug combinations and prescribing with a generic name are used. Hence, we will suggest regular prescription audit practices and conducting CMEs and training workshops for clinicians for the rational use of medicines in all healthcare settings to succeed in the rational use of medicine.
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.