ArticleBJGP open2024
Incidence of remote consultation on general practitioners' antibiotic prescriptions in 2021: a French observational study.
Article in BJGP open, 2024. 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.
- Between Patient Pressure and Professional Responsibility: Antibiotic Prescribing Practices in Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prescription patterns of anxiolytics in remote consultation versus in-person consultation: a cross-sectional study in French general practice.BJGP open · 2025Article
- The use of telemedicine in family medicine: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
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
backgroundIn patients with infectious diseases, remote consultation (RC) may be questionable compared with face-to-face office consultation (OC), not only because of the lack of physical examination but also because of the risk of overprescribing antibiotics (ATBs).
aimTo analyse ATB prescription in OC versus RC in a sample of French GPs. DESIGN &
settingThis is a retrospective observational cohort study in general practice in 2021. Anonymised data were collected from voluntary GPs.
methodThe influence of the mode of consultation on ATB prescription was analysed using a χ² test. A secondary multivariate analysis investigated the factors influencing the use of OC or RC in patients who received at least one ATB.
resultsIn total, 35 503 consultations with an identifiable rating were included, corresponding to seven doctors' activities, practising with five locums and three residents. ATBs were prescribed in 10.41% of RCs and 6.77% of OCs (
conclusionRC is associated with a more frequent ATB prescription than OC, mostly for patients aged 20-40 years, who are most likely to use new technologies; and for urinary tract infections or respiratory and ENT viral infections. Further studies on RC outcomes should be conducted to better analyse the impact of RC on the prescribing of ATBs.
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.