<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>23</volume><submitter>Atac O</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Aim&lt;/h4>To compare the competencies of primary care physicians (PCPs) with poor and good prescribing performance in frequently encountered indications.&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Primary care centers are one of the mostly visited health facilities by the population for different health issues.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed 6 125 487 prescriptions generated by 1431 PCPs which were selected by systematic sampling in 2016 in Istanbul. We defined PCPs as poor prescriber (n = 227) or good prescriber (n = 210) in terms of their prescribing performance per WHO/INRUD criteria. We compared solo diagnosis prescriptions of these two groups in 'percentage of prescriptions in compliance with clinical guidelines' and also rational prescribing indicators.&lt;h4>Findings&lt;/h4>Poor presc</pubmed_abstract><journal>Primary health care research &amp; development</journal><pagination>e22</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8991858</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Good versus poor prescribers: the comparison of prescribing competencies in primary care.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8991858</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Hayran O</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Aydin V</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Akici A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Karabey S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Atac O</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Good versus poor prescribers: the comparison of prescribing competencies in primary care.</name><description>&lt;h4>Aim&lt;/h4>To compare the competencies of primary care physicians (PCPs) with poor and good prescribing performance in frequently encountered indications.&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Primary care centers are one of the mostly visited health facilities by the population for different health issues.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed 6 125 487 prescriptions generated by 1431 PCPs which were selected by systematic sampling in 2016 in Istanbul. We defined PCPs as poor prescriber (n = 227) or good prescriber (n = 210) in terms of their prescribing performance per WHO/INRUD criteria. We compared solo diagnosis prescriptions of these two groups in 'percentage of prescriptions in compliance with clinical guidelines' and also rational prescribing indicators.&lt;h4>Findings&lt;/h4>Poor presc</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Mar</publication><modification>2025-04-19T09:20:41.916Z</modification><creation>2025-04-19T09:20:41.916Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8991858</accession><cross_references><pubmed>35343414</pubmed><doi>10.1017/S1463423622000111</doi></cross_references></HashMap>