Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30310967›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Defining and classifying terminology for medication harm: a call for consensus.

Nazanin Falconer, Michael Barras, Jennifer Martin, Neil Cottrell

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effect of electronic drug-drug interaction alerts on patient and clinician outcomes: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Implications of pharmacy students' involvement in collecting the best possible medication histories in hospital settings: A scoping review.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2025
    Article
  11. Criteria pharmacists use to refer patients to a post discharge pharmacist review clinic.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Drug-Related Hospital AdmissionsFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

4 authors.

Nazanin FalconerSchool of Pharmacy, Pharmacy Australia Centre of Excellence, The University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. n.falconer@uq.net.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4682-7890
Michael BarrasSchool of Pharmacy, Pharmacy Australia Centre of Excellence, The University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
Jennifer MartinSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of New Castle, University Dr, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Neil CottrellSchool of Pharmacy, Pharmacy Australia Centre of Excellence, The University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe multiplicity in terms and definitions of medication-related harm has been a long-standing challenge for health researchers, clinicians, and regulatory bodies. The purpose of this narrative review was to report the diversity of terms; compare definitions, classifications, and models describing medication harm; and suggest which may be useful in both clinical practice and the research setting.

methodsA narrative review of key studies defining and/or classifying medication harm terminology was undertaken.

resultsThis review found that numerous terms are used to describe medication harm, and that there is a lack of consistency in current definitions, classifications, and applications. This lack of consistency applied across clinical jurisdictions and regulatory terminologies. A number of limitations in current definitions and classifications were identified. These included the exclusion of key types of medication harm events, ambiguous wording, and a lack of clarity and consensus on subclassifications. In general, there was some overlap in key models from the literature and these were presented to describe similarities and differences.

conclusionWithout uniformity quantifying, comparing, combining, or extrapolating medication harm data, such as a rate of harm in a specific population, is a challenge for those involved in medication safety and pharmacovigilance. There is a pressing need for further discussion and international consensus on this topic. Adoption of standard descriptors by practitioner groups, regulatory and policy organisations would foster quality improvement and patient safety.

Indexed as

ConsensusDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansMedication ErrorsPatient SafetyPharmacovigilanceAdverse drug eventsAdverse drug reactionsDrug-related problemsMedication errorsMedication harm

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.