Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38361846›Full record

ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2023

A comparative study on perception and use of generic drugs between public and private health practitioners.

R Priyadarsini, Y Nisha Maheswari, M Lakshmi Prabha, J Ezhil Ramya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R PriyadarsiniDepartment of Pharmacology, Tirunelveli Medical College and Hospital, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.
Y Nisha MaheswariDepartment of Pharmacology, Tirunelveli Medical College and Hospital, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.
M Lakshmi PrabhaDepartment of Pharmacology, Tirunelveli Medical College and Hospital, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.
J Ezhil RamyaDepartment of Pharmacology, Tirunelveli Medical College and Hospital, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.
Tirunelveli Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: The perception of generic drugs may vary significantly between government and private doctors because physicians in the private sector have more prescribing choices and flexibility. Hence, this study was undertaken to analyse the knowledge, attitude and perception (KAP) of government and private physicians on generic drugs. Materials and Methods: This was a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study conducted among physicians working in public and private health sectors. The questionnaire had 25 closed-ended questions related to the KAP of generic medicine. The overall scores were categorised using Bloom's cut-off point. The Chi-square or Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare the differences between the two groups. Results: About 80% of the participants in both groups agreed that generic medicines contain the same active ingredients as brand-name drugs, are less expensive and are available in the Indian market. Nearly 84% of government physicians and only 64% of private physicians believed that generic medicines are just as effective and secure as branded medicines ( Conclusions: Knowledge and acceptance of generic drugs regarding efficacy, safety, bioequivalence and therapeutic failure are low among both government and private physicians.

Indexed as

Genericsperceptionphysicianspracticesprivate sectorpublic sector

Identifiers

PMID38361846
PMCPMC10866250
OpenAlexW4389887291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.