ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Awareness and use of tools to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing among physicians and pharmacists in Saudi Arabia: a nationwide cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Attitudes, barriers, and facilitators toward tools supporting appropriate prescribing among healthcare professionals: a cross-sectional study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPotentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) contributes significantly to treatment burden, specifically in older people. Detecting PIP and improving prescribing practices are therefore crucial for ensuring patient safety and positive outcomes.
aimThis study aimed to assess physicians' and pharmacists' awareness and use of tools to identify PIP, as well as their confidence in recommending medication for older people.
methodA national cross-sectional survey was conducted in Saudi Arabia using a 15-item questionnaire. The online questionnaire covered participants' demographics, their experience with PIP tools including awareness, frequency of use and the type of resources utilized. Both open-ended and closed-ended questions were included, with closed-ended questions formatted as multiple-choice and Likert scale. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses of the data was undertaken using Stata version 16.
resultsA total of 271 participants completed the questionnaire, half (n = 138, 50.9%) were pharmacists. Only a third (n = 81, 29.9%) of participants were familiar with PIP tools. Providers focusing on older people were significantly more aware of PIP tools (p < 0.001). Significantly more pharmacists (n = 50, 36.2%) demonstrated an awareness of PIP tools compared to physicians (n = 31, 23.3%) (p = 0.02). Confidence in recommending appropriate medications for older people varied, with 43.9% of participants having moderate confidence.
conclusionThis study highlights the lack of awareness among physicians and pharmacists in Saudi Arabia regarding the validated PIP tools to support prescribing and medication management practices. There is a need to develop, disseminate and support the use of translated, validated and culturally appropriate PIP tools in this context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39718759What 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.