Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29954724›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2018

Adverse Drug Event Reporting From Clinical Care: Mixed-Methods Analysis for a Minimum Required Dataset.

David Peddie, Serena S Small, Katherin Badke, Chantelle Bailey, Ellen Balka, Corinne M Hohl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

David Peddie *Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5571-2302
Serena S Small *Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3627-9042
Katherin Badke *Vancouver General Hospital, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5415-7236
Chantelle Bailey *Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2221-8647
Ellen Balka *Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2094-7907
Corinne M Hohl *Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9210-7838

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients commonly transition between health care settings, requiring care providers to transfer medication utilization information. Yet, information sharing about adverse drug events (ADEs) remains nonstandardized.

objectiveThe objective of our study was to describe a minimum required dataset for clinicians to document and communicate ADEs to support clinical decision making and improve patient safety.

methodsWe used mixed-methods analysis to design a minimum required dataset for ADE documentation and communication. First, we completed a systematic review of the existing ADE reporting systems. After synthesizing reporting concepts and data fields, we conducted fieldwork to inform the design of a preliminary reporting form. We presented this information to clinician end-user groups to establish a recommended dataset. Finally, we pilot-tested and refined the dataset in a paper-based format.

resultsWe evaluated a total of 1782 unique data fields identified in our systematic review that describe the reporter, patient, ADE, and suspect and concomitant drugs. Of these, clinicians requested that 26 data fields be integrated into the dataset. Avoiding the need to report information already available electronically, reliance on prospective rather than retrospective causality assessments, and omitting fields deemed irrelevant to clinical care were key considerations.

conclusionsBy attending to the information needs of clinicians, we developed a standardized dataset for adverse drug event reporting. This dataset can be used to support communication between care providers and integrated into electronic systems to improve patient safety. If anonymized, these standardized data may be used for enhanced pharmacovigilance and research activities.

Indexed as

adverse drug eventadverse drug reactionclinician-informed designdata fieldsdatasetmixed-methodspharmacovigilancereporting

Identifiers

PMID29954724
PMCPMC6043729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.