ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2022
Assessment of prescribing errors reported by community pharmacy professionals.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Medication errors in community pharmacies: a systematic review of the international literature.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of prescribing competencies among final year medical students in Gezira State, Sudan.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication errors have serious consequences for patients' morbidity and mortality. The involvement of pharmacy professionals in the prescribing and dispensing procedure allowed the detection of a range of drug-related problems in addition to identification by prescribers. They are often the first point of contact in the healthcare system in identifying prescribing errors and intervening in these errors by dealing with the prescribers and the patients.
objectivesThis study aimed to assess prescribing errors reported by community pharmacy professionals in Gondar Town, North West Ethiopia.
methodsA self-administered cross-sectional survey was employed from February 29 to June 23, 2020, to collect data on prescribing errors reported by community pharmacy professionals. All community pharmacy professionals found in Gondar town were included. Community pharmacy professionals who were ill at the time of study and who had less than 6 months of work experience were excluded.
resultsSeventy-four pharmacy professionals participated in the study with a response rate of 93.6%. The overall prevalence of prescribing errors was 75.1% (95% CI 71.08-78.70). Of these errors, drug selection was the most common (82.4%), followed by errors of commission (79.7%) and errors of omission (78.4%). Antibiotics (63.5%) were commonly involved in prescribing errors, followed by analgesics (44.5%) and antipsychotics (39.5%).
conclusionThe findings of this study revealed a high prevalence of prescribing errors in Gondar, Ethiopia. Drug selection was the most prescribed error, followed by errors of commission. Stakeholders should design interventions such as training, integrating prescribers with clinical pharmacists and supervising interns by seniors. Large-scale studies that include potential factors of prescribing problems are recommended for future researchers.
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.