Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,084

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Principles of Educational Outreach ('Academic Detailing') to Improve Clinical Decision Making

Open access
Soumerai, Stephen B.·1990·JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association

Abstract

With the efficacy and costs of medications rising rapidly, it is increasingly important to ensure that drugs be prescribed as rationally as possible. Yet, physicians' choices of drugs frequently fall short of the ideal of precise and cost-effective decision making. Evidence indicates that such decisions can be improved in a variety of ways. A number of theories and principles of communication and behavior changes can be found that underlie the success of pharmaceutical manufacturers in influencing prescribing practices. Based on this behavioral science and several field trials, it is possible to define the theory and practice of methods to improve physicians' clinical decision making to enhance the quality and cost-effectiveness of care. Some of the most important techniques of such "academic detailing" include (1) conducting interviews to investigate baseline knowledge and motivations for current prescribing patterns, (2) focusing programs on specific categories of physicians as well as on their opinion leaders, (3) defining clear educational and behavioral objectives, (4) establishing credibility through a respected organizational identity, referencing authoritative and unbiased sources of information, and presenting both sides of controversial issues, (5) stimulating active physician participation in educational interactions, (6) using concise graphic educational materials, (7) highlighting and repeating the essential messages, and (8) providing positive reinforcement of improved practices in follow-up visits. Used by the nonprofit sector, the above techniques have been shown to reduce inappropriate prescribing as well as unnecessary health care expenditures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1990.03440040088034

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 1,084

Metadata

Authors
Soumerai, S. B.
Venue
JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Published
1990-01-26
Volume
263
Issue
4
Pages
549
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2042472315
Cited by
1,084
References
23
FWCI
17.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Principles of Educational Outreach ('Academic Detailing') to Improve Clinical Decision Making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1990.03440040088034
The paper
Soumerai, S. B. (1990). Principles of Educational Outreach ('Academic Detailing') to Improve Clinical Decision Making. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03440040088034

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.