Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40075034›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2025

Evidence-Based Design of Prescription Medication Information: An Updated Scoping Review.

Andrea M Russell, Rebecca Lovett, Abigail Vogeley, Denise A Nunes, Carolyn McKelvie, Wayne Middleton, Michael Wolf

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Andrea M RussellDivision of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 N Lake Shore Dr., 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. andrea.russell@northwestern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6869-9581
Rebecca LovettDivision of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 N Lake Shore Dr., 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Abigail VogeleyDivision of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 N Lake Shore Dr., 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Denise A NunesGalter Health Sciences Library, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Carolyn McKelvieLuto Research, Bradford, UK.
Wayne MiddletonLuto Research, Bradford, UK.
Michael WolfDivision of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 750 N Lake Shore Dr., 10th Floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.

Funding

Luto Research UK Unrestricted grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWell-designed prescription medication information (PMI), defined as materials which communicate the essential information needed for a patient to safely and accurately self-administer a medication at or near the time of prescribing, is important for patient education. A previous review identifying best practices in the design of PMI was last completed using studies published through 2015.

objectiveThe aim of this review was to present an updated description of studies comparing one or more types of PMI, including details of if or how patients were involved in PMI design, and to consolidate design elements associated with positive outcomes.

methodsFour databases (Ovid, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane) were searched for studies comparing one or more types of PMI using a specified literature search with follow-up citation searching of included articles. Eligible studies were (1) conducted in English-speaking countries, (2) randomized controlled trials, and (3) published in 2016 or later. Consistent findings from at least two well-conducted studies were deemed 'strong' evidence and inconsistency in study findings or quality were deemed 'moderate' evidence.

resultsThirty-two articles were included and most had some risk (n = 24) or high risk of bias (n = 4). Two-thirds of articles (n = 21) reported on the details of PMI development, and over half (n = 14) conducted formal pilot testing or obtained feedback from patients. Findings suggested benefits when patients were involved in PMI development. Twelve studies examined written medication information (e.g., leaflets), ten examined pharmacy-generated contained labelling (e.g., instructions printed on pill bottles), two examined supplemental information (e.g., medication regimen charts), and fourteen examined PMI delivered using technology-supported tools (e.g., text message instructions). The most prevalent assessed outcomes were knowledge (n = 19), behaviors (n = 17), attitudes/beliefs (n = 11), and clinical outcomes, such as blood pressure (n = 3). Several studies demonstrated positive outcomes when PMI was designed according to health literacy principles of plain language, typographic cues, actionable instructions, large font, and white space. Multiple trials of pictograms and illustrations alongside paired text and text messages to deliver PMI also had positive outcomes. Although there were several studies that examined interactive websites, audio, and video delivery of PMI, mixed findings resulted in moderate evidence. Novel methods of PMI delivery were identified: a plain language label for as-needed medications, strategic memory training, inclusion of patient photos and quotes, Quick Response codes, and electronic health record strategies.

conclusionsOverall, a high proportion of studies included patients in the development of PMI and focused on behavioral outcomes. However, clinical outcomes appear to be understudied. In addition to health literacy principles, there is strong evidence for pictograms with paired text when used in written medication information and pharmacy-generated labels. There is moderate evidence for using text messages to deliver PMI. Novel methods require additional study to determine best practices in design.

Indexed as

Drug LabelingPatient Education as TopicPrescription DrugsHumansPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID40075034
PMCPMC12098189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.