Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8646148›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1996

Lessons from international experience in controlling pharmaceutical expenditure. II: Influencing doctors.

K Bloor, N Freemantle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluating patients' perceptions regarding generic medicines in Jordan.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2013
    Article
  9. Article
  10. It is a good time to expand your circle!Anesthesia and analgesia · 2011
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Drug reimbursement: indicators of inappropriate resource allocation.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2002
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

K BloorDepartment of Health Sciences and Clinical Evaluation, University of York.
N Freemantle

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is the second of three papers that review international policies to control spending on drugs and to improve the efficiency of drug use. This paper reviews policies influencing doctors' prescribing of drugs--particularly the use of budgetary restrictions, information and feedback, and guidelines--and evaluates the impact of these policies. Studies evaluating incentive systems are limited, but evidence suggests that providing information on its own will not lead to substantial changes in practice and that more active strategies should be evaluated.

Indexed as

Health ExpendituresBudgetsDrug CostsDrug IndustryDrug Information ServicesDrug PrescriptionsFeedbackHealth PolicyHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'United KingdomPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID8646148
PMCPMC2351250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.