Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8762744›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1996

Influences on prescribing in non-fundholding general practices.

M P Eccles, J Soutter, D N Bateman, M Campbell, J M Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. A qualitative comparative investigation of variation in general practitioners' prescribing patterns.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Prescribing behaviour in general practice: the impact of promoting therapeutically equivalent cheaper medicines.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1997
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

M P EcclesCentre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
J Soutter
D N Bateman
M Campbell
J M Smith

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe experience from general practice fundholding suggests that financial incentives may influence prescribing; guidelines and hospital prescribing are two other suggested influences.

aimA study was undertaken to establish general practitioners' attitudes to a financial prescribing incentive scheme, the presence and use of guidelines, and the influence of prescribing initiated within secondary care.

methodA postal questionnaire survey of non-fundholding general practices in the former Northern Region was conducted.

resultsPractices' thinking and subsequent decisions about the incentive prescribing scheme were most often influenced by discussions within the practice (45%). Those practices that achieved their savings under the incentive scheme were less likely than those not achieving savings to feel that the target was not achievable, the time scale was unacceptable, and that the philosophy behind the scheme was unacceptable. Forty-five per cent of practices received advice from neither a medical nor a pharmaceutical adviser; 27% of practices received advice from both, 12% from a medical adviser only and 16% from a pharmaceutical adviser only. Of the practices that tried to make their target savings, 91% intended to increase generic prescribing; fewer than one-third of practices mentioned any other measure. Prescribing guidelines were reported by a minority of practices, although reported rates of use were high when these were present. Clinical guidelines for three conditions, asthma, diabetes and hypertension, were present in more than 50% of practices; 25% of practices had no clinical guidelines. Hospital prescribing was reported as 'always' or 'usually' influencing prescribing for diabetes by 57% of respondents, ischaemic heart disease by 55%, peptic ulceration by 49%, asthma by 42% and hypertension by 39%.

conclusionsGeneral practitioner prescribing is influenced by a complex web of factors, with no single factor pre-eminent. To understand this area further, there is a need to take each of these areas and ascertain the match between doctors' perceptions and actual practice.

Indexed as

Drug UtilizationPractice Patterns, Physicians'Attitude of Health PersonnelDrug PrescriptionsEnglandFamily PracticeFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMalePhysicians, FamilyReimbursement, IncentiveSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID8762744
PMCPMC1239636

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.