ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2024
Evaluation of appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in primary healthcare institutions in China using proxy indicator.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and method considerations for equity-centered implementation science and practice: A PEDALs approach.Global health research and policy · 2026Article
- Psychosocial determinants of antibiotic stewardship decisions among Chinese clinicians across hospital tiers: a longitudinal study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development of AWaRe-Based Quality Indicators to Assess the Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Healthcare in South Africa.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison between model global AWaRe-based quality indicators and quality indicators developed to assess the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in primary healthcare in South Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional evaluation of rational antibiotic prescribing in Kabul based on WHO indicators.BMC infectious diseases · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Our objectives were to develop a set of proxy indicators (PIs) suited for assessing antibiotic use appropriateness in China's primary healthcare institutions (PHIs), and assess performance scores of these PIs while exploring factors that influence the antibiotic appropriateness. Methods: We selected potential PIs for the PHIs through a RAND-modified Delphi procedure, and assessed clinimetric properties, focusing on measurability, applicability, and potential for improvement. PIs with favorable clinimetric properties were used to evaluate antibiotic prescription appropriateness by calculating performance scores of each PI. Institutions were categorized into three clusters representing different levels of appropriateness. We used the chi-square test and an ordinal logistic regression model at PHI level to explore factors influencing antibiotic appropriateness. Findings: Eighteen PIs were developed through two rounds of online surveys and one face-to-face meeting involving 20 stakeholders. All PIs met the clinimetric properties criteria and were used to analyze 209,662 antibiotic prescriptions across 269 PHIs. The percentage of PHIs meeting the target ranged from 3.1% to 69.3%, with 6 PIs below 10%. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions was significantly associated with percentages of patients' gender of the PHIs. Interpretation: The varied and suboptimal performance of the PIs indicated the need for diverse efforts to enhance the rational antibiotic use at PHI level. It was necessary to devise distinct sets of PIs for diverse settings in future endeavors. Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 72374009, 81973294).
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.