Introduction of the computer assisted prescribing scheme Prodigy was premature

BMJ 1996; 313 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7064.1083 (Published 26 October 1996) Cite this as: BMJ 1996;313:1083
  1. Iain E Buchan, Research fellow, medical informatics unit,
  2. Rudolf Hanka, Director, medical informatics unit,
  3. David Pencheon, Consultant public health physician,
  4. Peter Bundred, Senior lecturer in primary care
  1. Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 2SR
  2. Department of Primary Care, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX

    EDITOR,—Jacqui Wise writes about claims that have been made since an interim report was published on the computer assisted prescribing project Prodigy.1 2 We are disappointed by the lack of statistical evidence in the report and thus by its lack of scientific integrity.

    Prodigy, which was used by 137 practices, was evaluated over the period December 1995 to February 1996.2 In response to the question “How much would you want to continue with Prodigy?” 14 of the 86 respondents indicated that they would continue …

    View Full Text

    Log in

    Log in through your institution


    * For online subscription