ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021
Analysis of the third WHO Global Safety Challenge 'Medication Without Harm' patient-facing materials: exploratory descriptive study.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evaluation of Paediatric Nursing Students' Medication Calculation Competence: An Observational Study Using a Gamified Contest.Nursing open · 2025Observational
- Development of an Educational Brochure about Treatment Options for Pregnant Women with Opioid Use Disorders.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Patient Participation in Medication Safety for Noncommunicable Diseases: A Qualitative Study of General Practitioners, Pharmacists, and Outpatients' Perspectives in Beijing.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Risk prediction model of polypharmacy for community-dwelling elderly patients: An assessment tool for early detection.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
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
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate patients' views on the content and use of the 'Five Moments for Medication Safety' materials developed as part of the WHO's 'Medication Without Harm' Global Patient Safety Challenge. These comprise a booklet, flyer, infographic poster, pamphlet and mobile application. They include recommended questions for patients to ask healthcare professionals to gain a better understanding of their medication.
methodsStructured interviews were conducted with members of the public who entered an outpatient pharmacy in a London teaching hospital, using a combination of open and closed questions. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. χ
resultsWe approached 147 people; 100 (68%) agreed to take part. Of these, 83% thought that the materials would be 'quite' or 'very' useful. Potential barriers to their use were patients being of the view that they already ask healthcare professionals about their medicines or that there would be limited time available to answer their questions during consultations. Fifty-nine per cent of participants stated that they would prefer to be given the materials in waiting areas before seeing a healthcare professional; 61% thought they should be displayed on television screens in general practice surgeries. Age was significantly associated with preference for the mobile application (χ
conclusionsPatients' views of the Five Moments for Medication Safety materials were generally positive. Our findings suggest that they should be displayed on television screens in waiting areas and given to patients prior to appointments. More advice is needed for patients on how to incorporate the questions suggested in the resources into a brief healthcare consultation.
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.