SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018
Systematic review of predictive risk models for adverse drug events in hospitalized patients.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Electronic health record-based prediction models for in-hospital adverse drug event diagnosis or prognosis: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence of adverse drug reactions in the primary care setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review of predictive risk models for adverse drug events in hospitalized patients.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Pooled it
- Prediction tools to prioritise hospitalised adult patients at risk of drug related problems: An umbrella review.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based clinical decision support tool for stratifying intravenous medication risk in hospitalized patients with heart failure.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Embracing the Digital Revolution: How Artificial Intelligence is Transforming Clinical Trials in Older Participants.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
- Risk prediction models for adverse drug reactions in pediatrics: a scoping review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Towards a prescribing monitoring system for medication safety evaluation within electronic health records: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Challenges in detecting and predicting adverse drug events via distributed analysis of electronic health record data from German university hospitals.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a score for identifying hospital stays that trigger a pharmacist intervention: integration into a clinical decision support system.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Drug response in the era of precision medicine: A methodological review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Neural network analysis of the contribution of psychotropic prescription sequences to the risk of non-psychiatric adverse events in bipolar and schizophrenia spectrum disorders.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictive model for the risk of cytokine release syndrome with glofitamab treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Blood advances · 2024Article
- Protocol for the development and validation of a Polypharmacy Assessment Score.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2024Article
- Patients' and Clinicians' Perceptions of the Clinical Utility of Predictive Risk Models for Chemotherapy-Related Symptom Management: Qualitative Exploration Using Focus Groups and Interviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Healthcare risk stratification model for emergency departments based on drugs, income and comorbidities: the DICER-score.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Proceedings of the International Ambulatory Drug Safety Symposium: Munich, Germany, June 2023.Drug safety · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAn emerging approach to reducing hospital adverse drug events is the use of predictive risk scores. The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise models developed for predicting adverse drug event risk in inpatients.
methodsEmbase, PubMed, CINAHL and Scopus databases were used to identify studies of predictive risk models for hospitalized adult inpatients. Studies had to have used multivariable logistic regression for model development, resulting in a score or rule with two or more variables, to predict the likelihood of inpatient adverse drug events. The Checklist for the critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) was used to critically appraise eligible studies.
resultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Ten described the development of a new model, whilst one study revalidated and updated an existing score. Studies used different definitions for outcome but were synonymous with or closely related to adverse drug events. Four studies undertook external validation, five internally validated and two studies did not validate their model. No studies evaluated impact of risk scores on patient outcomes.
conclusionAdverse drug event risk prediction is a complex endeavour but could help to improve patient safety and hospital resource management. Studies in this review had some limitations in their methods for model development, reporting and validation. Two studies, the BADRI and Trivalle's risk scores, used better model development and validation methods and reported reasonable performance, and so could be considered for further research.
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.