Incentives in prescribing, dispensing and pharmaceutical spending: A scientometric mapping.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
F1000Research Pub Date : 2025-02-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.156306.1
Tocaruncho-Ariza L H, Riascos-Ochoa J, Jimenez-Barbosa W G
{"title":"Incentives in prescribing, dispensing and pharmaceutical spending: A scientometric mapping.","authors":"Tocaruncho-Ariza L H, Riascos-Ochoa J, Jimenez-Barbosa W G","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.156306.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Health systems worldwide are struggling to ensure the affordability of medicines. Prescription, dispensing, and pharmaceutical expenditures are key variables that highlight the need to understand how global scientific evidence is generated against factors (implicit and non-explicit) that influence these variables.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Explore and provide a detailed description of the characteristics of the global scientific production of Open Access articles related to the prescription, dispensing and pharmaceutical expenditure faced by health systems worldwide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A five-stage scientometric mapping was performed based on a systematic search of 8 databases. The five stages are: i) retrieval, ii) migration, iii) analysis, iv) visualization and v) interpretation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A corpus of evidence from 103 systematic literature reviews was obtained, screened and sifted, visualizing the countries, authors, databases, journals, institutions and time periods that contributed most to evidence generation. Central research themes are identified and phenomena related to article publication are discussed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The analysis reveals a clear leadership of the United Kingdom and the United States in scientific production on prescribing, dispensing and pharmaceutical expenditure in health systems worldwide. This scientific production is mainly focused on financing policies, pharmaceutical incentives and interventions, and rational use of medicines. There is also evidence of the scarcity of scientific production in Latin American publications and authors, which could generate interest for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"13 ","pages":"1333"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11826077/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.156306.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Health systems worldwide are struggling to ensure the affordability of medicines. Prescription, dispensing, and pharmaceutical expenditures are key variables that highlight the need to understand how global scientific evidence is generated against factors (implicit and non-explicit) that influence these variables.

Objectives: Explore and provide a detailed description of the characteristics of the global scientific production of Open Access articles related to the prescription, dispensing and pharmaceutical expenditure faced by health systems worldwide.

Methods: A five-stage scientometric mapping was performed based on a systematic search of 8 databases. The five stages are: i) retrieval, ii) migration, iii) analysis, iv) visualization and v) interpretation.

Results: A corpus of evidence from 103 systematic literature reviews was obtained, screened and sifted, visualizing the countries, authors, databases, journals, institutions and time periods that contributed most to evidence generation. Central research themes are identified and phenomena related to article publication are discussed.

Conclusions: The analysis reveals a clear leadership of the United Kingdom and the United States in scientific production on prescribing, dispensing and pharmaceutical expenditure in health systems worldwide. This scientific production is mainly focused on financing policies, pharmaceutical incentives and interventions, and rational use of medicines. There is also evidence of the scarcity of scientific production in Latin American publications and authors, which could generate interest for future research.

处方、配药和药品支出的激励:科学计量学映射。
导言:世界各地的卫生系统正在努力确保药品的可负担性。处方、配药和药品支出是关键变量,强调需要了解全球科学证据是如何针对影响这些变量的因素(隐性和非显性)产生的。目的:提供关于药物处方和调剂的科学生产的全景,及其与世界各地卫生系统药品支出的关系。方法:在系统检索8个数据库的基础上,进行五阶段科学计量学制图。五个阶段是:i)检索,ii)迁移,iii)分析,iv)可视化和v)解释。结果:从103篇系统文献综述中获得了证据语料库,经过筛选和筛选,可视化了对证据生成贡献最大的国家、作者、数据库、期刊、机构和时间段。确定了中心研究主题,并讨论了与文章发表有关的现象。结论:分析表明,英国和美国在全球卫生系统的处方、调剂和药品支出的科学生产方面明显领先。这种科学生产主要侧重于融资政策、药物激励和干预措施以及合理使用药物。还有证据表明,拉丁美洲出版物和作者的科学成果稀缺,这可能会引起人们对未来研究的兴趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
F1000Research
F1000Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍: F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信