ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Towards greener prescribing? Swedish general practitioners' support for policies to reduce pharmaceutical pollution.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Environmentally Safe and Just Pharmacy: A Framework and Action Plan for Operating within the Earth System Boundary for Novel Entities.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPrescribing pharmaceuticals is essential to improve health, but it also has substantial environmental impact. This study investigated the extent to which Swedish general practitioners (GPs) are willing to integrate environmental aspects into treatment decisions and their opinions on policies to reduce pharmaceutical pollution.
methodsA questionnaire assessing environmental considerations in prescribing was developed and distributed to 1233 Swedish GPs and physicians in training (response rate: 22%) between September 2023 and June 2024. It included 3 patient cases to assess trade-offs between therapeutic effect and environmental impact of pharmaceuticals used for pain management, blood pressure reduction, and contraception. Questions about attitudes to policies to reduce the environmental impact of pharmaceuticals were also included. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
resultsMost respondents were willing to prescribe a less effective pharmaceutical if it was environmentally preferable, 77% for pain management and blood pressure reduction, and 50% for contraception. Environmental impact was ranked as the least important factor in prescribing decisions when compared to cost, regional treatment guidelines, dosage intervals, and user-friendliness. A total of 68% of respondents agreed that physicians should consider environmental aspects when prescribing, however only a few often searched for environmental information when prescribing. Policies directed towards other stakeholders, such as authorities and the pharmaceutical industry, received substantial support.
conclusionSwedish GPs are willing to consider environmental factors when prescribing. However, other factors are more often considered and GPs attribute higher responsibility to other actors. Improving access to environmental information about pharmaceuticals could support greener prescribing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.