Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30563498›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

The contribution of Ghanaian patients to the reporting of adverse drug reactions: a quantitative and qualitative study.

Tom G Jacobs, H Hilda Ampadu, Jarno Hoekman, Alexander N O Dodoo, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 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. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Tom G JacobsWHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences UIPS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
H Hilda AmpaduWHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences UIPS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jarno HoekmanWHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences UIPS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Alexander N O DodooThe African Collaborating Centre for Pharmacovigilance, Accra, Ghana.
Aukje K Mantel-TeeuwisseWHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Policy and Regulation, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences UIPS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. A.K.Mantel@uu.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnder-reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is a major challenge for pharmacovigilance in Africa. This study sets out to assess the level of awareness of Ghanaian patients about ADRs and ADR-reporting and explores how different patients in Ghana recognize an ADR and the steps they take when they experience an ADR.

methodsThis was a two-part study consisting of a survey to quantify the awareness of Ghanaian patients on ADRs and ADR-reporting, and in-depth interviews to explore how patients recognize an ADR and the steps they take thereafter. Participants were selected from 28 health care facilities (HCF) in rural and urban areas in 4 out of the 10 administrative regions of Ghana. Chi-square tests were used to examine associations between demographic variables and i) awareness of ADRs and ADR-reporting, ii) ADR experience and iii) awareness of the Ghana Food and Drug Authority (Ghana-FDA) and its patient reporting system (PRS). Only participants that indicated they experienced an ADR were included for the in-depth interviews. Data was investigated for participants' awareness of ADRs, ADR reporting and steps taken when they experience ADRs.

resultsOf the total 572 participants enrolled in the study, 14% indicated they were unaware of ADRs and were excluded. Of the remaining 491 participants, 38% had experienced an ADR, of which 67% reported the ADR, 68% of them reported it to a doctor. Only 3% of the 491 participants were aware of the Ghana-FDA's PRS. The interview phase consisted of 33 patients who had experienced an ADR. Three key findings from the interview phase were; most participants recognized an ADR themselves, the symptoms of the ADR were the most mentioned reason for reporting and participants experienced a wide variety of obstacles in ADR-reporting.

conclusionsMost Ghanaian patients appear unaware of or unable/unwilling to use formal national channels for ADR reporting like the Ghana-FDA PRS. Motivation for ADR reporting appeared mainly personal and not communal. These findings warrant further attention in order to increase patient reporting of ADRs.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAgedDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleGhanaHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatientsPharmacovigilanceQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAdverse drug reactionsCommunicationPatient interviewsPatient reportingPharmacovigilanceQuestionnaire

Identifiers

PMID30563498
PMCPMC6299566

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.