Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29844715›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2018

Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice of adverse drug reaction reporting among healthcare professionals in secondary and tertiary hospitals in the capital of Pakistan.

Zaka Un Nisa, Ayesha Zafar, Farooq Sher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Adverse-drug reaction reporting by Pharm D students during hospital training.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Knowledge, attitude and practice of hospital pharmacists towards pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting in Najran, Saudi Arabia.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Zaka Un NisaFaculty of Medicine, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 45320, Pakistan.
Ayesha ZafarInstitute of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Pakistan.
Farooq SherDepartment of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) underreporting is a great challenge to pharmacovigilance. Healthcare professionals should consider ADR reporting as their professional obligation because the effective system of ADR reporting is important to improve patient care and safety. This study was designed to assess the knowledge, attitude, practice and factors associated with ADR reporting by healthcare professionals (physicians and pharmacists) in secondary and tertiary hospitals of Islamabad. A pretested questionnaire comprising of 27 questions (knowledge 12, attitude 4, practice 9 and factors influencing ADR reporting 2) was administered to 384 physicians and pharmacists in public and private hospitals. Respondents were evaluated for their knowledge, attitude and practice related to ADR reporting. Additionally, the factors which encourage and discourage respondents to report ADRs were also determined. The data was analysed by using SPSS statistical software. Among 384 respondents, 367 provided responses to questionnaire, giving a response rate of 95.5%. The mean age was 28.3 (SD = 6.7). Most of the respondents indicated poor ADR reporting knowledge (83.1%). The majority of respondents (78.2%) presented a positive attitude towards ADR reporting and only a few (12.3%) hospitals have good ADR reporting practice. The seriousness of ADR, unusualness of reaction, new drug involvement and confidence in the diagnosis of ADR are the factors which encourage respondents to report ADR whereas lack of knowledge regarding where and how to report ADR, lack of access to ADR reporting form, managing patient is more important than reporting ADR legal liability issues were the major factors which discourage respondents to report ADR. The study reveals poor knowledge and practice regarding ADR reporting. However, most of the respondents have shown a positive attitude towards ADR reporting. There is a serious need for educational training as well as sincere and sustained efforts should be made by Government and Hospital Authorities to ensure proper implementation of ADR reporting system in all of the hospitals.

Indexed as

Adverse drugs reactionsAttitudeKnowledgePharmacovigilancePractices and Spontaneous ADR reporting

Identifiers

PMID29844715
PMCPMC5961757

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.