ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2023
A comparative study on perception and use of generic drugs between public and private health practitioners.
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.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gaps in access and trust: essential medicine availability, affordability, and barriers to generic medicine use.Public health action · 2026Article
- Pharmaceutical quality and cost-effectiveness of branded versus generic medicines across 22 drug types and 8 therapeutic categories: a citizen-funded comparative study from regulated retail outlets in Kerala, India.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of public's knowledge, attitude and experiences towards the generic medications in building healthcare policy.PloS one · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.