ArticleThe British journal of radiology2020
Pharmacovigilance and radiologists: How well do they get along?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacy practice and policy research in Türkiye: a systematic review of literature.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024Review
- Defining the awareness and attitude of the clinicians through pharmacovigilance in Turkey.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesConsidering the growing use of imaging modalities and contrast agents, radiologists are prone to encounter adverse drug reactions (ADR). In the current study, we mainly aim to evaluate the knowledge of radiologists regarding pharmacovigilance (PV). Also, we intend to gather information about their previous ADR experiences. Secondarily, we hope to increase the awareness about contrast-medium-related ADRs and attract attention to the importance of properly reporting these ADRs.
methodsA survey was generated by using an online survey webpage, and the relevant link was e-mailed to radiologists and radiology residents. The survey begins with a short explanation about the study. The second section contains questions about PV knowledge level, and the final section aims to gather information about the experienced ADRs.
resultsThe survey was completed by 202 participants. 65.3% stated that they were aware of PV. 24.8% of the participants said that they know the national PV program. 97% told that they knew the term ADR. 66.3% of the participants encountered an ADR. 53.7% of them reported these ADRs. 70.8% of them reported these ADRs to a clinician.
conclusionsRadiologists encounter ADRs almost as frequently as the other doctors. Their awareness about PV is similar with other healthcare professionals. They have fewer information about TUFAM and PvCPs. Radiologists generally prefer to communicate with a clinician about an ADR. Overall condition of radiologists about PV is quite similar with other healthcare professionals and education can improve it, as for the others. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Radiologists encounters ADRs almost as frequently as the other doctors. Overall condition of radiologists about PV is quite similar with other healthcare professionals and education can improve it, as for the others.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.