ArticleClinical and translational science2026
Physicians' Perceptions of Prescribing in Pregnancy and Package Inserts: A Survey of General and Hub Hospitals in Japan.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated how Japanese physicians make decisions about prescribing medications during pregnancy, based on safety information provided in drug package inserts. An online questionnaire survey targeted physicians working at pregnancy hub hospitals with expertise in drug treatment during pregnancy and physicians in general hospitals without such specialization. The findings revealed significant differences in prescribing behavior and perceptions of safety. Physicians at hub hospitals were more likely to view certain medications as safe for pregnant individuals when supported by epidemiological data, even if such drugs were contraindicated based on preclinical studies. In contrast, physicians in general hospitals followed the wording in the package inserts more strictly and often avoided prescribing. Physicians from both groups strongly needed more detailed descriptions of therapeutic benefits and epidemiological evidence in the pregnancy sections of package inserts. The results suggest that current drug labeling in Japan does not provide sufficient information for evidence-based risk-benefit decision-making in pregnancy care. Differences in prescribing behavior were attributed to disparities in training and access to specialized information. The study highlights the importance of revising Japanese package inserts to include more precise descriptions of clinical benefit and human data to improve the quality of medication decision-making during pregnancy and reduce unnecessary contraindications. Improved access to training and updated information may help close the gap between general and specialized physicians and promote more consistent and appropriate care for pregnant individuals across healthcare settings.
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.