Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15924503›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2005

Designing safe drug names.

Bruce L Lambert, Swu-Jane Lin, Hiangkiat Tan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Is an Indication-Based Prescribing System in Our Future?P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bruce L LambertDepartment of Pharmacy Administration, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA. lambertb@uic.edu
Swu-Jane Lin
Hiangkiat Tan
University of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

Auditory Perception of Drug Names: Neighborhood EffectsR01HS011609 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI LAMBERT, BRUCE L. · 2003 to 2006
$424k
AHRQ HHS R01 HS011609-01 A2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent observational studies of medication errors in community pharmacies suggest that 'wrong drug' errors, which occur when a patient receives a drug other than the one prescribed, may occur as many as 3.9 million times per year in the US. Similarity between drug product attributes, especially similarity between drug names, is thought to be a contributing cause of these errors. The challenge facing drug companies is to design new drug names that will not be confused with existing names. In this paper, we attempt to lay out a systematic approach to the design of safe drug names by characterising the process of design as a multiple-objective optimisation problem. We then identify and define the most important constraints (both technical and legal/regulatory) and objectives (such as meaning, memorability, and pronouncability) that a drug name must satisfy and critique methods for evaluating a given name with respect to each safety objective and constraint. There are a variety of preapproval tests that can be done on a name to test its vulnerability to confusion. These include computerised searches for existing similar names or products, soliciting expert judgements, doing traditional psycholinguistic tests on memory and perception and observing error rates during simulated ordering, dispensing and administration tasks. A different set of strategies is needed to prevent confusion between similar names that are already in use. Preventing confusion between already marketed products typically involves collecting voluntary reports of names involved in confusion errors, posting warnings and alerts both electronically and in areas where drugs are used, including the indication on the prescription, storing confusing drugs in different locations, improving lighting, providing magnifiers, removing one of the confusing drugs from the system or insisting on double-checking for products thought to be vulnerable to confusion.Finally, since no single design will be optimal with respect to all of the objectives, we describe several approaches to selecting one design from a set of competing alternatives. The pharmaceutical industry and the US FDA have taken important steps recently to improve the preapproval screening of new drug names, but a great deal of research still needs to be done to establish a valid scientific basis for these decisions.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical PreparationsTerminology as TopicConfusionDrug LabelingHumansMedication ErrorsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID15924503
OpenAlexW2011355572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.