ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2026
Protocol for a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial to optimize antibiotics prescription in Nepal.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the top ten threats to global health. Over-prescription of antibiotics, a key driver of AMR, has been documented in many low- and middle-income countries. Low-cost interventions that do not add substantially to the physician workload, are consistent with good physician practices and WHO guidelines, and serve as a reminder on the risks of overprescribing antibiotics are critically needed. This protocol describes a study that aims to test the effect of two such interventions among junior physicians in Nepal. The first intervention requires physicians to specify the diagnosis in their prescription note-thus reminding them of the risks of over-prescription at the time of care. The second intervention provides individualized feedback on their actual prescription behavior. Methods: The study is a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial among an anticipated 60 physicians in 5 hospitals in Nepal, with data collected from approximately 3600 patients over a 6-month period. Physicians in the hospitals will receive the first intervention (the mandate), sequentially, beginning at the end of the first month after a refresher training on AMR. They will receive the second intervention (the feedback), again sequentially, beginning at the end of the third month. The primary outcome is the antibiotics prescription rate, which will be assessed-for both interventions-using multilevel, mixed-effect regressions (random intercepts for physicians and fixed effects for hospitals) accounting for potential confounders. Conclusion: The study will contribute to current global efforts to combat AMR by utilizing low-cost, context-informed interventions to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in resource-limited 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.