ArticleTherapeutic advances in drug safety2025
Implementation of electronic distribution of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications by the Danish Medicines Agency: a survey study of physicians' experiences and preferences.
Article in Therapeutic advances in drug safety, 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.
- How direct healthcare professional communications are operationalised by general practitioners and community pharmacists in Ireland: a national cross sectional study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 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
Background: The efficient distribution of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs) is crucial for ensuring healthcare providers promptly receive important new safety information. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the electronic distribution of DHPCs by the Danish Medicines Agency (DKMA) and to assess how future safety communication can be improved. Design: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey among Danish physicians using a self-administered questionnaire. Methods: DKMA sends DHPCs to healthcare professionals via an electronic mailbox called e-Boks which is linked to the unique personal identifier. To evaluate DKMA's distribution of DHPCs, participants were asked about awareness, frequency and barriers of reading, preferred distribution channel and overall satisfaction. To further identify potential improvements, respondents were asked about general preferences regarding sender and channels of safety information in addition to which information sources they use to keep up-to-date. Results: A total of 2238 physicians completed the survey corresponding to a response rate of 26% based on the total target population. The total awareness was 81%. Compared to previous research, awareness of GPs increased from 66% to 82%, and the percentage of GPs who rarely or never read DHPCs decreased from 33% to 20%. In addition, our study revealed a preference for receiving DHPCs electronically through e-Boks as opposed to workplace-delivered postal letters, and a preference for the DKMA over pharmaceutical companies as the sender of DHPCs. One-third of the respondents were either 'dissatisfied' or 'very dissatisfied' with the current solution. A professional mailbox and point-of-care alerts when prescribing may complement the primary distribution channel to strengthen the uptake. Additionally, existing information sources already frequented by the target group may be used to communicate safety information. Conclusion: The DKMA's electronic distribution of DHPCs suggests an improvement and may serve as inspiration for other agencies. However, the considerable dissatisfaction calls for further improvements.
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.