ArticlePatient preference and adherence2023
Views on Suspected Adverse Drug Events in Older Adults with Chronic Conditions: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medication Regimen Complexity and Patient-Reported Adverse Drug Events in Korean Community Pharmacies: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Strengthening pharmacovigilance through patient reporting: a scoping review of awareness, barriers, and facilitators.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Review
- How patients deal with side-effects of topical intraocular pressure-lowering medication in glaucoma: a cross-sectional study from a tertiary ophthalmology clinic.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of self-reported adverse drug events in elderly co-morbid patients in northeastern China: a cross-sectional study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- 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
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore how elderly patients with chronic conditions identify and cope with suspected adverse drug events (ADEs) in northern China with the aim of encouraging the elderly to participate in medication safety monitoring. Patients and Methods: A purposive sampling method was adopted to select 15 elderly patients with chronic conditions from a medical center in northern China for semi-structured-interviews, and the data were collated and analyzed through thematic framework analysis. Results: Five major themes and 12 subthemes were refined, namely (1) lack of knowledge: poor awareness of the medications and ambiguous knowledge of ADEs, (2) barriers to identifying suspected ADEs: unawareness and uncertainty, seeking alternative explanations, and limited access to information, (3) the basis for identifying suspected ADEs: time cues and actively seeking communication (4) coping with suspected ADEs: cope with it themselves, not talking to the health care provider on their own initiative and actively seeking communication, and (5) expectations: desire for more reliable information and hope to be safeguarded for medication safety. Conclusion: Due to the lack of relevant knowledge and limited access to information, the elderly were limited in identifying suspected ADEs, but they were positive towards participating in medication safety monitoring and hoped to obtain reliable medication information and detailed medication assessment by enhancing communication with medical professionals in order to achieve medication safety.
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.