ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2026
The use of generic versus brand names in (clinical) pharmacology education across Europe: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. 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.
- Exploring the association between pharmacy curricular tracks and students' attitudes toward generic medicines: insights from a comparative study in Egypt.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn pharmacology and clinical pharmacology (P&CP) teaching, using generic names of medicines contributes to global comprehensibility. However, brand names are often used in routine clinical practice, which may pose a challenge in the educational setting. This study aimed to explore P&CP teachers’ use of and attitudes towards generic and brand names in undergraduate education, as well as national prescription regulations.
methodsA survey was conducted with P&CP teachers from 38 European countries. An electronic questionnaire was used to collect data on the participants’ profiles, the nomenclature used and preferred in undergraduate education, and prescribing practices. The latter were then verified with national regulatory authorities.
resultsSixty-one teachers from 23 countries participated in the study, the majority being physicians (n = 47). In total, 13 (21%) teachers use only generic names in their teaching, while 46 (75%) use both generic and brand names. Thirty-four (56%) teachers preferred listing brand names in case-based teaching, as this reflects real life. Conversely, 37 (61%) teachers stated that students should not be exposed to brand names before graduation. Generic prescribing is either allowed or mandatory in all participating countries except two, where brand-name prescribing is mandatory.
conclusionThis study shows that generic names must remain fundamental in P&CP education, but brand names also play a role, especially in case-based education, reflecting real-life practice. Potential implications of generic and brand prescribing for internationalisation in education could be worth further attention.
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.