ArticleJournal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research
Perception of Nigerian medical students on adverse drug reaction reporting.
Article in Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare students' knowledge, attitude and perception of pharmacovigilance: A systematic review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Health outcomes and policy in pharmay curricula among Arab countries: An evaluation of 191 academic institutions.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2021Article
- Article
- Urgent need to modernize pharmacovigilance education in healthcare curricula: review of the literature.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Review
- Implementation of a module to promote competency in adverse drug reaction reporting in undergraduate medical students.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spontaneous reporting (SPR) and intensive monitoring are the conventional systems used for detecting, recording, and reporting adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Using spontaneous reporting a lot of successes has been made as existing ADRs were identified and new ones prevented through this methods. The aim of this appraisal was to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and the practice of medical students with regards to ADRs reporting and to see if differences exist between the level of study and genders. The questionnaire was adopted, modified, and validated from previous studies. It comprised of 25 questions. It was administered year-IV and V medical students of Bayero University Kano, Nigeria. The data collected were coded and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20, currently known as IBM SPSS Statistics. The response rate was 74%. Among the 108 participants, 80% got the definition of ADRs correct; 63% of them knew the precise functions of pharmacovigilance (PV). In addition, 82% strongly agreed that ADR reporting is health care workers responsibility; 82% also said PV should be taught in detail. Meanwhile, 99% have noticed patient experiencing ADRs; 67% said even mild ADRs should be reported. The outcome of this study showed good knowledge and attitude with respect to ADRs and PV among the medical students surveyed. Unfortunately, the practice of medical students was found to be unsatisfactory. There is a need to upgrade the students teaching the curriculum with respect to ADRs monitoring.
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.