ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Effectiveness of the Prospective Prescription Review System in Reducing Irrational Prescriptions at a Tertiary Specialty Hospital: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prospective prescription review system can improve prescription rationality, but its effectiveness in high-volume specialty care settings is not well established. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the prospective prescription review system in reducing irrational prescriptions and to analyze factors associated with successful interception. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed all outpatient and emergency prescriptions issued between January 1 and December 31, 2024, at an eye, ear, nose, and throat tertiary hospital in Shanghai, China. Among 2,559,342 prescriptions, 123,914 (4.84%) flagged as irrational by the prospective prescription review system were included. Results: The overall interception success rate was 32.99% (40,877/123,914). The prescription rationality rate increased from 95.23% (2,476,305/2,600,219) to 96.79% (2,477,144/2,559,342) after excluding intercepted prescriptions ( Conclusions: The prospective prescription review system substantially reduced irrational prescriptions and improved prescription rationality. Higher review levels were associated with higher interception rates, and physicians' attitudes also played a critical role. Paired-organ dose standardization emerged as an important consideration in ophthalmology and otolaryngology practice. Collaboration between the prospective prescription review system and pharmacists is essential for optimizing prescription review outcomes.
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.