IPSIndian Journal of Pharmacology
Home  IPS  Feedback Subscribe Top cited articles Login 
Users Online : 1102 
Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Navigate Here
  Search
 
  
Resource Links
   Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
   Article in PDF (150 KB)
   Citation Manager
   Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
In This Article
   References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1482    
    Printed84    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded71    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
 Table of Contents    
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2011  |  Volume : 43  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 94
 

Author's reply


Department of Neuropsychopharmacology, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences, India

Date of Web Publication15-Jan-2011

Correspondence Address:
Sangeeta Sharma
Department of Neuropsychopharmacology, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 21455440

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions



How to cite this article:
Sharma S. Author's reply. Indian J Pharmacol 2011;43:94

How to cite this URL:
Sharma S. Author's reply. Indian J Pharmacol [serial online] 2011 [cited 2021 Dec 4];43:94. Available from: https://www.ijp-online.com/text.asp?2011/43/1/94/75688


Sir,

This is with reference to the comments on our article [1] . The limitation of the study is mentioned in the discussion. Similar experiences have been reported by other authors in this area [2],[3] where a response rate ranging from 38%-70% was reported. We agree with the comments regarding generalization of findings from such studies and suggested measures to increase the response rate. Due care was taken with regard to design and layout of the questionnaire and pilot testing. A well sensitized, trained post graduate researcher collected the data after seeking appointment with the respondents recognizing time constraints etc.

Despite a low response rate, we feel the data is important to be shared as it reflects the initial trends pertaining to a very important but neglected area. If it is able to inspire more such studies the publication would have achieved at least a part of its objective i.e., eliciting the attitude and opinion towards essential medicine formulary to bring about further positive change. A low response rate may also be indication of a primary indifference towards the subject. Response elicited by persuasive methods may not be true and honest. We feel that the data presented reflects a primary uninfluenced response.

 
  References Top

1.Sharma S, Kh R, Chaudhury RR. Attitude and opinion towards essential medicine formulary. Indian J Pharmacol 2010;42:150-2.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
2.McGavock H, Wilson-Davis K, McGavoack SA - Formulary revision: eliciting the opinion of users. Br J Gen Pract 1996;46:419-21.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Harding JM, Modell M. Freudenberg S, MacGregor R, Rea JN, Steen C, et al - Prescribing: the power to set limits. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 1985;290:450-3.  Back to cited text no. 3
    




 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 

    

Site Map | Home | Contact Us | Feedback | Copyright and Disclaimer
Online since 20th July '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow