Trial reportDrug safety2012
Workshop- and telephone-based interventions to improve adverse drug reaction reporting: a cluster-randomized trial in Portugal.
Trial report in Drug safety, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02134587 (Implementation of a Hospital Pharmacovigilance Service and Comparison of Algorithms for Adverse Drug Reaction Causality Assessment), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Implementation of a Hospital Pharmacovigilance Service and Comparison of Algorithms for Adverse Drug Reaction Causality Assessment
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving adverse drug event reporting by healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Educational interventions in pharmacovigilance to improve the knowledge, attitude and the report of adverse drug reactions in healthcare professionals: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Factors Associated with Underreporting of Adverse Drug Reactions by Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review Update.Drug safety · 2023Pooled it
- Evolution of adverse drug reactions reporting systems: paper based to software based.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Post-marketing withdrawal of 462 medicinal products because of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review of the world literature.BMC medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Trial
- Effect of an educational intervention to improve adverse drug reaction reporting in physicians: a cluster randomized controlled trial.Drug safety · 2015Trial
- Bridging the Gap: Promoting Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting through Innovative Strategies in Zero-reporting Zones at Karaikal - An Educational Intervention Study at Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Center.Journal of research in pharmacy practice · 2026Article
- Linking Activity Theory Within User-Centered Design: Novel Framework to Inform Design and Evaluation of Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems in Pharmacy.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- A Mobile App Leveraging Citizenship Engagement to Perform Anonymized Longitudinal Studies in the Context of COVID-19 Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring: Development and Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
- Increasing Collaborative Discussion in Case-Based Learning Improves Student Engagement and Knowledge Acquisition.Medical science educator · 2022Article
- Knowledge, attitude and practice of hospital pharmacists towards pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting in Najran, Saudi Arabia.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022Article
- Smartphone-based mobile applications for adverse drug reactions reporting: global status and country experience.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Workshop on Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting, Pharmacovigilance and Its Implementation in Cancer Hospital in Nepal: An Event Report.Advances in medical education and practice · 2020Article
- Urgent need to modernize pharmacovigilance education in healthcare curricula: review of the literature.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Review
- Adverse drug reaction reporting among physicians working in private and government hospitals in Kuwait.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2017Article
- Adverse drug events-Analysis of a decade. A Portuguese case-study, from 2004 to 2013 using hospital database.PloS one · 2017Article
- A comprehensive intervention for adverse drug reactions identification and reporting in a Pediatric Emergency Department.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
- Promoting adverse drug reaction reporting: comparison of different approaches.Revista de saude publica · 2016Article
- Are consumers ready to take part in the Pharmacovigilance System?--a Portuguese preliminary study concerning ADR reporting.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is the method most widely used by pharmacovigilance systems, with the principal limitation being the physician's underreporting.
objectiveThis study sought to evaluate the results of workshop and telephone-interview interventions designed to improve the quantity and relevance of ADR reporting by physicians.
methodsA cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted on 6579 physicians in northern Portugal in 2008. Following randomization, we allocated 1034 physicians to a telephone-interview intervention, 438 to a workshop intervention and the remaining 5107 to the control group. At the workshop, a real clinical case was presented and participants were then asked to report on it by completing the relevant form. In the telephone intervention, participants were asked (i) whether they had ever had any suspicion of ADRs; (ii) whether they had experienced any difficulties in reporting; (iii) whether they remembered the different methods that could be used for reporting purposes; and (iv) whether they attached importance to the individual physician's role in reporting. We followed up physicians to assess ADR reporting rates to the Northern Pharmacovigilance Centre. In terms of relevance, adverse reactions were classified as serious or unexpected. Statistical analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis, and generalized linear mixed models were applied using the penalized quasi-likelihood method. The physicians studied were followed up over a period of 20 months.
resultsTwo hundred physicians underwent the educational intervention. Comparison with the control group showed that the workshop intervention increased the spontaneous ADR reporting rate by an average of 4-fold (relative risk [RR] 3.97; 95% CI 3.86, 4.08; p < 0.001) across the 20 months post-intervention. Telephone interviews, in contrast, proved less efficient since they led to no significant difference (p = 0.052) vis-à-vis the control group in ADR reporting (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00, 1.04). The effects of the interventions on the reporting rate of serious and high-causality ADRs indicated that the RRs associated with workshops were 6.84 (95% CI 6.69, 6.98; p < 0.001) for serious ADRs and 3.58 (95% CI 3.51, 3.66; p < 0.001) for high-causality ADRs.
conclusionsWhereas telephone interventions only increased spontaneous reporting in the first 4 months of follow-up, workshops significantly increased both the quantity and relevance of spontaneous ADR reporting for more than 1 year.
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.