ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023
Identification of Confusing Medicine Proprietary Names: Toward Safe Medicine Use-A Cross-Sectional Study in Sri Lanka.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLook-alike sound-alike (LASA) medications have similar pronunciation (phonetic) and/or manifestation (orthographic), which could create confusion among users and challenge the safe use of medicines. The availability of foreign products in local markets aggravates the situation. This study was designed to examine the registered medicine proprietary names in Sri Lanka to discern the presence of similar medicine names in the industry.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted on the registered drug proprietary names in Sri Lanka. Using the RAND and RANK functions in Microsoft® excel® 365, a random sample of 385 proprietary names was selected. Two evaluators independently evaluated each proprietary name in the sample against the other registered proprietary names following a stepwise text filtering method. After each filter, the resulting proprietary names were manually examined for identical, similar-looking, and similar-sounding proprietary names to the name under evaluation. The observations were matched, categorized, and collated into ten groups.
resultsAmong the 385 names evaluated, 138 (35.84%) proprietary names had no similarity to existing other registered proprietary names. The rest of the names (n = 247, 64.15%) were found to be either identical (n = 03 pairs), look-alike (n = 91 pairs), or sound-alike (n = 80 pairs) to the registered proprietary names.
conclusionThe findings revealed the presence of equal and similar proprietary names in the system. A multifactorial strategy led by the National Medicine Regulatory Authority (NMRA) is recommended to minimize the confusing names entering the system. Primarily the NMRA's call for action should include adequate industry guidance with specific guidelines, a significant pre-submission assessment process, and denying approval of LASA proprietary names.
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.