Observational studyTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Patient Preferences for Electronic Versus Paper Patient Information Leaflets: A Survey Among Patients in Sweden.
Observational study in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn compliance with legal requirements, medications are mandated to include a patient information leaflet (PIL) in a physical/paper format that serves as a vital source of information about the medication. While the use of an electronic PIL (ePIL) ensures the availability of the most current information for patients, the prevailing preference between the traditional PIL and ePIL remains uncertain. This observational study aimed to address this gap by reporting the findings of an online survey designed to compare patient preferences for an ePIL versus a paper PIL.
methodsConducted across a total of 15 pharmacies in Sweden, the survey enlisted patients via convenience sampling to rate their preference for an ePIL versus a PIL on a 7-point scale together with other questions on, for example, the ease of information retrieval after their visit to the pharmacy. Data collection commenced in December 2022 and ended in November 2023. The primary hypothesis posited that the ePIL format would emerge as the preferred choice. Most participants were female (66%), and the average age was 56 years.
resultsThe findings highlighted an inclination towards the ePIL as the preferred choice (58% preferred ePIL, 11% preferred PIL, and 31% were indifferent), with respondents expressing that information retrieval was notably more convenient compared to the paper-based format. Older participants were generally indifferent towards the format. The majority of patients reported familiarity with receiving information in digital formats.
conclusionsThese results suggest the readiness of patients in Sweden to transition to ePILs from the traditional paper PIL.
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.