ArticleThe European journal of general practice2026
Patients' perspectives in German general practice on discussing the environmental impact of medications: A qualitative study.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmaceuticals represent a major source of carbon emissions in primary care. General practitioners could avoid prescribing climate-harmful medications and consider eco-friendly alternatives in shared decision-making processes. However, evidence on patients' perceptions of discussing medication-specific environmental impacts in primary care consultations in Germany remains limited.
objectivesTo explore patients' perceptions of discussing medications' environmental and climate impact during family medicine encounters and their willingness to switch to more eco-friendly options.
methodsThis qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with patients recruited through GP practices in Northern Germany. Inclusion criteria were long-term use of at least one medication, legal age, and informed consent. Twenty-five interviews were conducted and analysed using structured content analysis according to Kuckartz.
resultsRespondents expressed surprise when environment/climate topics were to be discussed in medical encounters but demonstrated openness to these topics and desired more information about their medications' environmental impact. Many interviewees showed willingness to switch to eco-friendly medications despite potential disadvantages including more frequent intake, increased side effect risk, or co-payments. Patients exhibited high trust in provider recommendations and sought greater information and transparency.
conclusionResults suggest opportunities to incorporate climate/environmental aspects into shared decision-making. Understanding patient perspectives enables GPs to address environmental/climate-friendly medication topics in treatment discussions. Patients are receptive to these discussions and willing to accept eco-friendly alternatives despite potential drawbacks. The high level of trust in provider recommendations positions family physicians as key actors in promoting environmental stewardship.
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.