The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What constitutes good prescribing?
Open accessAbstract
Drugs are the mainstay of medical treatment, yet there are few reports on what constitutes "good prescribing." What is more the existing guidance tends to imply that right answers exist, rather than recognising the complex trade offs that have to be made between conflicting aims. This paper proposes four aims that a prescriber should try to achieve, both on first prescribing a drug and on subsequently monitoring it. They are: to maximise effectiveness, minimise risks, minimise costs, and respect the patient's choices. This model of good prescribing brings together the traditional balancing of risks and benefits with the need to reduce costs and the right of the patient to make choices in treatment. The four aims are shown as a diagram plotting their commonest conflicts, which may be used as an aid to discussion and decision making.
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Parish, 1973, Drug prescribing—the concern of all., Journal of the Royal Society of Health, 4, 213, 10.1177/146642407309300414 · DOI
- Barber, 1991, Is “safe, effective and economic” enough? Pharmaceutical Journal, 246, 671
- 10.1093/fampra/8.3.276 · DOI
- Finney, 1965, The design and logic of a monitor of drug use., Journal of Chronic Diseases, 18, 77, 10.1016/0021-9681(65)90054-8 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.1975.03260250028021 · DOI
- Schwartz, 1989, Physician motivations for nonscientific drug prescribing., Soc Sci Med, 28, 577, 10.1016/0277-9536(89)90252-9 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Patients' perceptions of pharmacological and cognitive-behavioral treatments for anxiety disorders
Deacon, B. J., & Abramowitz, J. S. (2005) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7894(05)80062-0 · Cited by 78
Cole, C. P., & Routledge, P. (2018) · Pan African Medical Journal · doi:10.11604/pamj.2018.31.174.16729 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Barber, N.
- Affiliations
- University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Barber, Nick
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1995-04-08
- Volume
- 310
- Issue
- 6984
- Pages
- 923-925
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC2549298
- OpenAlex
- W2012050489
- Cited by
- 150
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 4.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
- Keywords
- prescribing guidance, drug effectiveness, drug safety, cost minimization, patient choice, benefits and risks, prescriber decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Choice Behavior, Drug Therapy, United Kingdom, Humans, Physician-Patient Relations, Drug Prescriptions, Quality of Health Care, State Medicine, Drug Costs, Patient Satisfaction
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
