ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2012
Prescribing errors in hospital practice.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the Satisfaction of Physicians in Using the Electronic Prescription System of Social Security in Iran: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- "Doctor, would it surprise you if there were prescribing errors in this patient's medication?" Identifying eligible patients for in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship: A matched case-control study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- A critical look into artificial intelligence and healthcare disparities.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Paediatric medication incident reporting: a multicentre comparison study of medication errors identified at audit, detected by staff and reported to an incident system.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Observational
- Development and implementation of medication-related clinical rules for obstetrics, gynaecology, and paediatric outpatients.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2024Article
- Prescribing errors in a Brazilian teaching hospital: Causes and underlying factors from the perspective of junior doctors.PloS one · 2023Article
- Prescribing errors in post - COVID-19 patients: prevalence, severity, and risk factors in patients visiting a post - COVID-19 outpatient clinic.BMC emergency medicine · 2022Observational
- The impact of drug order complexity on prospective medication order review and verification time.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Effects of stratified medication review in high-risk patients at admission to hospital: a randomised controlled trial.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2020Article
- What causes prescribing errors in children? Scoping review.BMJ open · 2019Article
- [Errors of prescription, transcription and administration according to pharmacological group at hospital].Revista espanola de salud publica · 2019Observational
- Prescribing errors by junior doctors- A comparison of errors with high risk medicines and non-high risk medicines.PloS one · 2019Article
- Risk of prescribing errors in acutely admitted patients: a pilot study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
- Pharmacist independent prescribing in secondary care: opportunities and challenges.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
- Temporal and other factors that influence the time doctors take to prescribe using an electronic prescribing system.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015Article
- Prevalence, nature and predictors of prescribing errors in mental health hospitals: a prospective multicentre study.BMJ open · 2014Article
- Junior doctor-led 'near-peer' prescribing education for medical students.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Article
- Exploring health professionals' experiences of medication errors in Saudi Arabia.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2013Article
- Medication errors in Jordan: A systematic review.International journal of critical illness and injury scienceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prescribing errors that occur in hospitals have been a source of concern for decades. This narrative review describes some of the recent work in this field. There is considerable heterogeneity in definitions and methods used in research on prescribing errors. There are three definitions that are used most frequently (one for prescribing errors specifically and two for the broader arena of medication errors), although many others have also been used. Research methods used focus primarily on investigating either the prescribing process (such as errors in the dose prescribed) or the outcomes for the patient (such as preventable adverse drug events). This complicates attempts to calculate the overall prevalence or incidence of errors. Errors have been reported in handwritten descriptions of almost 15% and with electronic prescribing of up to 8% of orders. Errors are more likely to be identified on admission to hospital than at any other time (usually failure to continue ongoing medication) and errors of dose occur most commonly throughout the patients' stay. Although there is evidence that electronic prescribing reduces the number of errors, new types of errors also occur. The literature on causes of error shows some commonality with both handwritten and electronic prescribing but there are also causes that are unique to each. A greater understanding of the prevalence of the complex causal pathways found and the differences between the pathways of minor and severe errors is necessary. Such an understanding would underpin theoretically-based interventions to reduce the occurrence of prescribing errors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.