The evidence base of the ten most prescribed drugs in England, France and the United States: a scoping review.

Drug evaluation Evidence based medicine Scoping review Treatment Efficacy

Journal

Journal of clinical epidemiology
ISSN: 1878-5921
Titre abrégé: J Clin Epidemiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8801383

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Jul 2024
Historique:
received: 26 03 2024
revised: 11 06 2024
accepted: 17 07 2024
medline: 26 7 2024
pubmed: 26 7 2024
entrez: 24 7 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To evaluate whether there is evidence of efficacy of the most commonly used medications in their primary indications. This scoping review was executed utilizing the Cochrane library and MEDLINE databases up to May 2023. The ten most prescribed medications in England, France, and the USA were identified using country-specific public databases. Up to three common indications in primary care were defined for each medication, based on a survey of general practitioners. The outcomes were determined by the authors to be patient-important outcomes, with placebo as the comparator. Two investigators independently conducted searches, following a predefined algorithm, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses of RCTs assessing the efficacy of these medications for each indication. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS or ROB 2.0 tools. We identified 21 drugs, covering 56 indications and 114 outcomes. Sixty-seven percent of the evaluated medications demonstrated efficacy for at least one outcome in at least one of the sought indications. Overall, evidence of efficacy was found for 48% of the indications. There was no study evaluating the efficacy of amoxicillin and salbutamol. For other drugs such as phloroglucinol or cholecalciferol, available studies suggested an absence of efficacy in the most common indications. This study underscores the lack of data regarding the level of evidence for the most prescribed medications. Limitations include the choice of outcomes, and the understanding that the absence of evidence is not synonymous with the absence of efficacy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39047918
pii: S0895-4356(24)00234-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111478
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

111478

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Joey Fournier (J)

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Inserm CIC 1406, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Grenoble, France.

Lorraine Barret (L)

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Inserm CIC 1406, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Grenoble, France.

Charles Khouri (C)

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Inserm CIC 1406, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Grenoble, France; Univ. Grenoble Alpes, HP2, Inserm U1300, Grenoble, France.

Florian Naudet (F)

INSERM CIC 1414, Rennes, France.

Remy Boussageon (R)

Department of General Practice, Université de Lyon, Lyon, France.

Matthieu Roustit (M)

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Inserm CIC 1406, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Grenoble, France; Univ. Grenoble Alpes, HP2, Inserm U1300, Grenoble, France. Electronic address: MRoustit@chu-grenoble.fr.

Classifications MeSH