Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26228658›Full record

ArticleResearch in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP

Linking NHS data for pediatric pharmacovigilance: Results of a Delphi survey.

Y M Hopf, J Francis, P J Helms, J Haughney, C Bond

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Y M HopfCentre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. Electronic address: yvonne.hopf@med.uni-muenchen.de.
J FrancisSchool of Health Sciences, City University London, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK.
P J HelmsChild Health, University of Aberdeen, Royal Aberdeen Children's Hospital, Westburn Road, Aberdeen AB25 2ZG, UK.
J HaughneyCentre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
C BondCentre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office ARPG/07/04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse drug events are a major cause of patient safety incidents. Current systems of pharmacovigilance under-report adverse drug reactions (ADRs), especially in children, leading to delays in their identification. This is of particular concern, as children especially have an increased vulnerability to ADRs.

objectivesThe objective was to seek consensus among healthcare professionals (HCPs) about barriers and facilitators to the linkage of routinely collected health data for pediatric pharmacovigilance in Scotland.

methodsA Delphi survey was conducted with a random sample of HCPs including nurses, pharmacists and doctors, working in primary or secondary care, in Scotland. Participants were identified from sampling frames of the target professionals such as an NHS workforce list for general practitioners and recruited by postal invitation. A total of 819 HCPs were invited to take part. Those agreeing to participate were given the option of completing the questionnaires online or as hard copy. Reminders were sent twice at a fortnightly interval. Questions content included description of professional role as well as testing for the willingness to support the proposed project and was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework of Behavior Change (TDF) and earlier qualitative work. Three Delphi rounds were administered, including a first round for item generation.

results121 of those invited agreed to take part (15%). The first round of the Delphi study included 21 open questions and generated over a 1000 individual statements from 61 participants that returned the questionnaires (50.4%). These were rationalized to 149 items for the second round in which participants rated their views on the importance (or not) of each item on a 9-point Likert scale (strongly disagree - strongly agree). After the third round, there was consensus on items that focused on professional standards, and practical requirements, overall there was support for data linkage and a multi-professional approach.

conclusionsIt would be acceptable to stakeholders to introduce a data linkage system for pharmacovigilance as long as identified concerns are addressed. Concerns included adherence to current professional, legal and ethical standards, as well resolving practical issues.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAttitude of Health PersonnelInformation Storage and RetrievalNational Health ProgramsPharmacovigilanceAgedChildFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedScotlandSurveys and QuestionnairesData linkageDelphiMixed methodsPharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID26228658
PMCPMC4748008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.