ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Patients' Experiences and Preferences for Medicine Information: An International Comparison Between Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and England.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Verbal and written medicine information are available to the public but the quality, ease of access, ease of understanding and use of these resources varies greatly between countries. Timely access to quality medicine information is essential to support patient safety. Objective: This international cross-sectional survey, conducted in low-to high-income countries, aimed to compare experiences of and preferences for medicine information sources among respondents with recent medicine use. Methods: The survey was originally developed in England (Kent), then adapted and translated for use in southern Thailand (Songkhla), Malaysia (Klang Valley), and central Uganda (Kampala). Data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics and Chi-squared tests. Results: A total 1588 respondents were involved in the study. Community pharmacies were the primary source of medicines in all four countries (40.7 to 65.3%). Most respondents (1460; 92%) had received at least one form of information with their medicine, but provision of written medicine information (WMI) varied between countries. A manufacturer's leaflet was the most frequent information source for patients in England, while verbal information was common in Thailand, Malaysia and Uganda. There was commonality across countries in the desire for verbal information with or without WMI (1330; 84.8%); aspects of medicine information wanted most frequently were instructions on medicine use (98.3%), indication (98.2%), name (94.4%) and possible side effects (94.3%); and the importance of providing leaflets with all medicines (87.5%). Fewer than 10% in Uganda would use internet based WMI, compared to between 20% and 55% elsewhere. Conclusion: Preferences for medicine information are similar across countries: verbal information is seen as most desirable, and the most wanted aspects of information are common internationally. Accessibility and understandability are key influences on preferred information sources. In-country regulations and practices should ensure that all medicine users can access the information necessary to maximise safe medicine use.
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.