Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of point of care testing for C reactive protein and training in communication skills on antibiotic use in lower respiratory tract infections: cluster randomised trial

Open access
Cals, J. W L, Butler, C. C, Hopstaken, R. M, Hood, K., Dinant, G.-J.·2009·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of general practitioner testing for C reactive protein (disease approach) and receiving training in enhanced communication skills (illness approach) on antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infection. DESIGN: Pragmatic, 2x2 factorial, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 20 general practices in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 40 general practitioners from 20 practices recruited 431 patients with lower respiratory tract infection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was antibiotic prescribing at the index consultation. Secondary outcomes were antibiotic prescribing during 28 days' follow-up, reconsultation, clinical recovery, and patients' satisfaction and enablement. INTERVENTIONS: General practitioners' use of C reactive protein point of care testing and training in enhanced communication skills separately and combined, and usual care. RESULTS: General practitioners in the C reactive protein test group prescribed antibiotics to 31% of patients compared with 53% in the no test group (P=0.02). General practitioners trained in enhanced communication skills prescribed antibiotics to 27% of patients compared with 54% in the no training group (P<0.01). Both interventions showed a statistically significant effect on antibiotic prescribing at any point during the 28 days' follow-up. Clinicians in the combined intervention group prescribed antibiotics to 23% of patients (interaction term was non-significant). Patients' recovery and satisfaction were similar in all study groups. CONCLUSION: Both general practitioners' use of point of care testing for C reactive protein and training in enhanced communication skills significantly reduced antibiotic prescribing for lower respiratory tract infection without compromising patients' recovery and satisfaction with care. A combination of the illness and disease focused approaches may be necessary to achieve the greatest reduction in antibiotic prescribing for this common condition in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN85154857.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.b1374

Cites

60 of 60 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 60 references

Cited by

See all 498

Metadata

Authors
Cals, J. W. L., Butler, C. C., Hopstaken, R. M., Hood, K., & Dinant, G.-J.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-05-05
Volume
338
Issue
may05 1
Pages
b1374-b1374
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2034781418
Cited by
498
References
60
FWCI
41.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Effect of point of care testing for C reactive protein and training in communication skills on antibiotic use in lower respiratory tract infections: cluster randomised trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.b1374
The paper
Cals, J. W. L., Butler, C. C., Hopstaken, R. M., Hood, K., & Dinant, G.-J. (2009). Effect of point of care testing for C reactive protein and training in communication skills on antibiotic use in lower respiratory tract infections: cluster randomised trial. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b1374

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.