ArticleDrug safety2016
Patient Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions: An International Survey of National Competent Authorities' Views and Needs.
Article in Drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors that influence patient and public adverse drug reaction reporting: a systematic review using the theoretical domains framework.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Pooled it
- Safety assessment for ibuprofen using disproportionality analysis: a decade of data from the Romanian national pharmacovigilance system.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Adverse Reactions by Radiopharmaceuticals: Retrospective Analysis of the Portuguese National Pharmacovigilance System.The Annals of pharmacotherapy · 2025Observational
- Comparison of the Completeness of Spontaneously Reported Adverse Drug Reactions by Consumers, Healthcare Professionals, and Pharmaceutical Companies: An Evaluation of Databases From Two High-Income Countries.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2025Article
- Medication Safety in Saudi Arabia: Evaluating the Current Situation and Identifying the Areas for Improvement.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Views on the Development and Use of a New Digital Adverse Drug Event Reporting Platform in Australia: A Qualitative Study.Drug safety · 2025Article
- Does the risk of hypersensitivity reactions to iopromide differ by sex, race, or across regions/countries? An analysis of 152 233 patients from 4 observational studies and the company's pharmacovigilance database.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Information Provided in German Adverse Drug Reaction Reports Sent by Physicians, Pharmacists and Consumers.Drug safety · 2023Article
- Patient involvement in pharmacovigilance: determinants and evolution of reporting from 2011 to 2020 in France.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- A cross-sectional study: comparison of public perceptions of adverse drug reaction reporting and monitoring in eastern and western China.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
- Parental reporting of adverse drug reactions in South Africa: An online survey.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2021Article
- Teaching Pharmacovigilance to Healthcare Students: Identifying Gaps and Opportunities for Improvement.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- The value of direct patient reporting in pharmacovigilance.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2020Article
- Knowledge, awareness, perception and reporting of experienced adverse drug reactions among outpatients in Nigeria.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2019Article
- Adverse Drug Reactions in Norway: A Systematic Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Use of a Patient-Friendly Terms List in the Adverse Drug Reaction Report Form: A Database Study.Drug safety · 2019Article
- The Role of European Patient Organizations in Pharmacovigilance.Drug safety · 2019Article
- The contribution of Ghanaian patients to the reporting of adverse drug reactions: a quantitative and qualitative study.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Current trends in pharmacovigilance: value and gaps of patient reporting.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to spontaneous reporting systems can make a valuable contribution to pharmacovigilance. However, the implementation and promotion of patient reporting systems (PRSs) differ worldwide.
objectiveThe objective of the study was to describe attitudes toward PRSs, and progress toward implementing such systems among national competent authorities participating in the World Health Organization Programme for International Drug Monitoring.
methodsA web-based questionnaire was constructed based on qualitative interviews, and distributed through SurveyMonkey
resultsA total of 143 valid questionnaires were received from 141 countries (79.2 %). A spontaneous reporting system for both healthcare professionals and patients was present in 58 countries (41.1 %). An official PRS to report ADRs directly was implemented in 44 countries (31.2 %) and in a pilot stage in five countries (3.5 %). Patients were not allowed to report in 34 countries (24.1 %). The reasons for not having an official PRS were mainly a lack of resources/budget (56.5 %) or a lack of information/education for patients (56.5 %). When analyzing the attitudes among the respondents toward a PRS, most acknowledge that the general public contributes to the detection or strength of drug safety signals (82.2 % agree or strongly agree) and with information that is not present in healthcare professional reports (80.7 % agree or strongly agree). For respondents, giving feedback to patients could be an incentive for patients to report more (80.8 % agree or strongly agree). To be able to further PRSs, guidelines on promoting a PRS efficiently to the general public (87.4 % agree or strongly agree), training courses/conferences (86.7 % agree or strongly agree), or a public list of Lareb's scientific publications (86.7 % agree or strongly agree) were the support measures most well accepted by the respondents.
conclusionsMost countries accept ADR reports from patients by an official reporting system designed for patients or through the existing system for healthcare professionals. The main reasons for not having a PRS is financial restraints and a lack of information/education of patients. Attitudes toward a PRS are positive, but some countries fear that they will not be able to handle an increase in reports.
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.