Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31961883›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Adverse drug reaction reporting practice and associated factors among medical doctors in government hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Solomon Shiferaw Nadew, Kidanemariam G/Michael Beyene, Solomon Worku Beza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Solomon Shiferaw NadewUSP/PQM, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-2773-5472
Kidanemariam G/Michael BeyeneUSP/PQM, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Solomon Worku BezaGAMBYMedical and Business College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) are global public health problems. In its severe form it may cause hospital admission, morbidity and mortality. Early reporting of suspected ADRs to regulatory authorities is known to be appropriate measure toinsure health and safety of public form such adverse drug reaction of drugs. In Addis Ababa, there is limited information on ADR reporting practices among medical doctors. Hence, this study aimed to assess ADR reporting practices and associated factors among doctors in government hospitals in Addis Ababa.

methodsAn institution based cross-sectional mixed-methods study design was used. Data werecollected from 407 doctors using self-administered questionnaire and five key informants using semi-structured questionnaire from October 01 to December 31, 2017. Binary logistic regression and thematic analysis methods for quantitative and qualitative data analysis were used respectively.

resultsOnly 94(27.4%) of doctors had ever reported ADRs to national pharmacovigilance center. The study showed that sex (AOR = 3.51, 95% CI: 1.76-7.03), level ofeducation (AOR = 5.01, 95% CI: 2.23-11.28), work experience (AOR = 4.59, 95% CI: 1.21-17.40), existence of ADR reporting form (AOR = 3.96, 95% CI: 1.07-14.61) and reporting to respective marketing authorization holders (AOR = 21.41, 95% CI: 5.89-77.88) were significantly associated with ADR reporting practices. Poor awareness and training on risk of under-reporting, feeling that reporting is minor, absence of appropriate reporting tools, delay and/or absence of feedback on reported ADRs, overly burdened doctors, negligence, fear of legal liabilityand communication gap were cited by key informants as barriers for reporting practice.

conclusionsAdverse drug reaction reporting practice among doctors wasfound to be low. Sex, level of education, work experience, existence of reporting form and reporting to marketing authorization holderswere significantly associated with ADR reporting practice. In addition, there are gaps in availabilities of guidelines, reporting systems and structure, pre-service and in-service training, and awareness of doctors on impact of reporting. Hence, improving access to ADR reporting form, decentralize safety monitoring system, and conducting awareness training on ADR reporting are essential to improve the ADR reporting practice.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPharmacovigilanceAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesEducational StatusEthiopiaFemaleHospitals, PublicHumansMalePhysiciansPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Sex Factors

Identifiers

PMID31961883
PMCPMC6974157

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.