ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2024
Stakeholder views on requiring diagnosis or clinical indication on e-prescriptions.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication safety organizations have been recommending the inclusion of diagnosis or clinical indication on prescription orders for decades. However, this information is typically not provided by prescribers and shared with pharmacists, despite the availability of data fields in the most commonly used standard for electronic prescriptions.
objectiveTo elucidate the views of selected industry stakeholders relative to perceived barriers to including diagnosis or indication on all electronic prescriptions.
methodsSemistructured concept elicitation interviews identified key issues. Survey items were refined iteratively by the research team. The final instrument consisted of 34 questions intended to elicit the importance and relative priority of perceived barriers and potential solutions. A link to the Internet survey was emailed to members of the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs in February 2023, with biweekly follow-up reminders.
resultsA total of 139 surveys were analyzed for a response rate of 9.6%. On the importance of resolving issues related to the inclusion of diagnosis or indication on e-prescriptions, a majority of respondents indicated "extremely important" or "very important" for all items except one. On level of agreement with statements about how to implement such a requirement, a majority indicated "strongly agree" or "agree" for 10 of 17 items.
conclusionsAlthough clearly exploratory, the results of our survey suggest industry stakeholder agreement that uniform inclusion of diagnosis or clinical indication on all e-prescriptions would improve patient safety and health outcomes. A number of important questions and potential barriers must be resolved for implementation to be successful.
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.