\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}

\title{Differences in Prescribing Errors Between Electronic Prescribing and
Traditional Prescribing among Medical Students: a randomized pilot study}



\author[1]{Samir El Abdouni}%
\author[1]{Laura Kalfsvel}%
\author[1]{Wim Rietdijk}%
\author[1]{Hugo van der Kuy}%
\author[1]{Floor van Rosse}%
\affil[1]{Erasmus MC}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{May 21, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Aims This randomized controlled pilot study aimed to assess the
differences in the frequency, type, and severity of prescribing errors
made by medical students when assessed in an electronic prescribing
system (EPS) compared to traditional prescribing methods (e.g.,
writing/typing out a prescription). Methods Fourth year medical students
in the period of November 1st to July 31st, 2023, were asked to
participate in this single center prospective, randomized, controlled
intervention study. Participants performed a prescribing assessment in
either an EPS (intervention group) or in a more traditional prescribing
platform (control group). The prescriptions were checked for errors,
graded, and categorized. Differences in prescribing errors, error
categories, and severity were analyzed. Results Out of 334 students, 84
participated in the study. Nearly all participants (98.8\%) made one or
more prescribing errors, primarily involving inadequate information
errors. In the intervention group, more participants made prescribing
errors involving the prescribed amount (71.4\% vs. 19.0\%;
P\textless{}0.01), but fewer involving administrative errors (2.4\% vs.
19.0\%; P=0.03). Prescribing-method-specific errors were identified in
4.8\% and 40.5\% of the intervention and control group, respectively,
with significant differences in overlapping errors as well. Conclusions
This study shows the importance of training electronic prescribing
(e-prescribing) competencies in medical curricula, in addition to
traditional prescribing methods. It identifies
prescribing-method-specific prescribing errors and emphasizes the need
for further research to define e-prescribing competencies. Additionally,
the need for an accessible real-life-like e-prescribing environment
tailored to educators and students is essential for effective learning
and incorporation of e-prescribing into medical curricula.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy


\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`MeaSureS-P_manuscript_final_20231121.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/702587/articles/688516-differences-in-prescribing-errors-between-electronic-prescribing-and-traditional-prescribing-among-medical-students-a-randomized-pilot-study}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Figure-1-MeaSureS-P/Figure-1-MeaSureS-P}

\end{center}
\end{figure}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Figure-2-MeaSureS-P/Figure-2-MeaSureS-P}

\end{center}
\end{figure}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Figure-3-MeaSureS-P-v2/Figure-3-MeaSureS-P-v2}

\end{center}
\end{figure}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Figure-4-MeaSureS-P/Figure-4-MeaSureS-P}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{document}

