ArticlePerspectives in clinical research
A clinical study to monitor prescription patterns, clinical outcomes, and adverse drug reactions among patients of various interstitial lung diseases attending respiratory medicine outpatient department at tertiary care hospital in Northern India.
Article in Perspectives in clinical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases in India: national challenges and implications for global health policies.Health research policy and systems · 2025Review
- Quality of life in patients with hypersensitivity pneumonitis and with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in real-life clinical practice.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to monitor prescription patterns, clinical outcomes, and adverse drug reactions (ADR) among patients of various interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted in the Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics in collaboration with the Department of Respiratory Medicine, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, for a period of 12 months (October 2020-September 2021). A total of 77 patients were enrolled after satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The prescriptions were collected, and necessary details were noted on the case report form. After completion of the study, the data were analyzed for prescription patterns, clinical outcomes, and quality of life with the help of a validated questionnaire-King's Brief ILD (KBILD) questionnaire. At the same time, ADRs, if any, were assessed using Hartwig's Severity Assessment Scale and Naranjo Causality Assessment Scale. Results: The most common ILD was acute/chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). Average number of drugs per encounter was 4.45. Crepitations were the most common clinical signs. Clubbing and rhonchi were reported maximum in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. It was found that psychological, breathlessness and activities, chest symptoms, and total KBILD reduced significantly after 3 months as compared to baseline with a statistically significant difference as Conclusion: The high proportion of patients clinically diagnosed with HP in our study highlights the importance of a detailed environmental exposure history in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with ILD to avoid inaccurate diagnoses. ADR-related hospital admissions are a significant problem in the health-care system.
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.