The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Primary non-compliance with prescribed medication in primary care.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE--To determine the rate of patients not redeeming their prescriptions (primary noncompliance) and assess the factors influencing this. DESIGN--Observational study comparing copies of prescriptions written by general practitioners with those dispensed by pharmacists and subsequent case record review. SETTING--A large rural general practice in Tayside. SUBJECTS--All 4854 patients who received prescriptions (20,921) written between January 1989 and March 1989. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--The rate of non-redemption of prescriptions. RESULTS--Seven hundred and two patients (14.5%) did not redeem 1072 (5.2%) prescriptions during the study period, amounting to 11.5% of men and 16.3% of women. Non-redemption was highest in women aged 16-29 (27.6% of women) and men aged 40-49 (18.3% of men). Of prescriptions issued to women for oral contraceptives 24.8% were not redeemed during the study period. In those who redeemed prescriptions 17% were not exempt from prescription charges compared with 33% of patients who failed to redeem them. The non-redemption rate was highest for prescriptions issued at the weekends, although this was a small proportion of all prescribing. Prescriptions issued by trainee general practitioners were also less likely to be redeemed. CONCLUSIONS--Non-redemption varies with age, sex, general practitioner, exemption status, and with day of the week the prescription was written. Observational studies of drug exposure can be more accurately estimated from dispensing rather than prescribing data.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Jick, H., Jick, S. S., & Derby, L. E. (1991) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.302.6779.766 · Cited by 839
Cited by
The Nordic Countries as a Cohort for Pharmacoepidemiological Research
Furu, K., Wettermark, B., Andersen, M., Martikainen, J. E., Almarsdottir, A. B., & Sørensen, H. T. (2010) · Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology · doi:10.1111/j.1742-7843.2009.00494.x · Cited by 585
Primary Medication Non-Adherence: Analysis of 195,930 Electronic Prescriptions
Fischer, M. A., Stedman, M. R., Lii, J., Vogeli, C., Shrank, W. H., Brookhart, M. A., & Weissman, J. S. (2010) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1253-9 · Cited by 572
Association of road-traffic accidents with benzodiazepine use
Barbone, F., McMahon, A., Davey, P., Morris, A., Reid, I., McDevitt, D., & MacDonald, T. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)04087-2 · Cited by 559
Self-citationPrevalence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Primary Nonadherence After Acute Myocardial Infarction
Jackevicius, C. A., Li, P., & Tu, J. V. (2008) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.706820 · Cited by 481
Antibiotic Exposure in Infancy and Risk of Being Overweight in the First 24 Months of Life
Saari, A., Virta, L. J., Sankilampi, U., Dunkel, L., & Saxen, H. (2015) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2014-3407 · Cited by 364
Metadata
- Authors
- Beardon, P. H., McGilchrist, M. M., McKendrick, A. D., McDevitt, D. G., & MacDonald, T. M.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1993-10-02
- Volume
- 307
- Issue
- 6908
- Pages
- 846-848
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2024693051
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Primary non-compliance with prescribed medication in primary care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.307.6908.846
- The paper
- Beardon, P. H., McGilchrist, M. M., McKendrick, A. D., McDevitt, D. G., & MacDonald, T. M. (1993). Primary non-compliance with prescribed medication in primary care. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.307.6908.846
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.