ArticlePloS one2015
Patient Safety in Medication Nomenclature: Orthographic and Semantic Properties of International Nonproprietary Names.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic literature review of LASA error interventions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Multilingual analysis of public discourse on opioid and non-opioid analgesics through social media: a cross-sectional infodemiological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Strengthening Signal Detection in Pharmacovigilance by Using International Nonproprietary Name (INN) Stems.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Linguistic Analysis of Generic-Generic Drug Name Pairs Prone to Wrong-Drug Errors for which Tall-Man Lettering is Recommended.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023Article
- Communication about medication management during patient-physician consultations in primary care: a participant observation study.BMJ open · 2022Observational
- Analogous comparison of registered brand name drugs of tablets and capsules commercially available in Thailand: A retrospective study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Linguistic Factors in Arabic for Miscommunication of Medication Names.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2020Article
- Description of the Risk Management of Medication Errors for Centrally Authorised Products in the European Union.Drug safety · 2020Article
- Using drug knowledgebase information to distinguish between look-alike-sound-alike drugs.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Article
- Nominal ISOMERs (Incorrect Spellings Of Medicines Eluding Researchers)-variants in the spellings of drug names in PubMed: a database review.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConfusion between look-alike and sound-alike (LASA) medication names (such as mercaptamine and mercaptopurine) accounts for up to one in four medication errors, threatening patient safety. Error reduction strategies include computerized physician order entry interventions, and 'Tall Man' lettering. The purpose of this study is to explore the medication name designation process, to elucidate properties that may prime the risk of confusion. METHODS AND
findingsWe analysed the formal and semantic properties of 7,987 International Non-proprietary Names (INNs), in relation to naming guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) INN programme, and have identified potential for errors. We explored: their linguistic properties, the underlying taxonomy of stems to indicate pharmacological interrelationships, and similarities between INNs. We used Microsoft Excel for analysis, including calculation of Levenshtein edit distance (LED). Compliance with WHO naming guidelines was inconsistent. Since the 1970s there has been a trend towards compliance in formal properties, such as word length, but longer names published in the 1950s and 1960s are still in use. The stems used to show pharmacological interrelationships are not spelled consistently and the guidelines do not impose an unequivocal order on them, making the meanings of INNs difficult to understand. Pairs of INNs sharing a stem (appropriately or not) often have high levels of similarity (<5 LED), and thus have greater potential for confusion.
conclusionsWe have revealed a tension between WHO guidelines stipulating use of stems to denote meaning, and the aim of reducing similarities in nomenclature. To mitigate this tension and reduce the risk of confusion, the stem system should be made clear and well ordered, so as to avoid compounding the risk of confusion at the clinical level. The interplay between the different WHO INN naming principles should be further examined, to better understand their implications for the problem of LASA 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.