Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37987966›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2023

Comparative Analysis of Information Provided in German Adverse Drug Reaction Reports Sent by Physicians, Pharmacists and Consumers.

Patrick Christ, Diana Dubrall, Matthias Schmid, Bernhardt Sachs

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Drug safety and mandatory reporting].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. [Drug safety and mandatory reporting].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Patrick ChristResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3197-5639
Diana DubrallResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8763-051X
Matthias SchmidInstitute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0788-0317
Bernhardt SachsResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Bonn, Germany. Bernhardt.Sachs@bfarm.de.ORCID 0000-0001-8260-0891
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices · DEUniversity Hospital Bonn · DE

Funding

German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) V-2020.2/68502/2020-2024Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology (IMBIE) at the University Hospital of Bonn V-2020.2/68502/2020-2024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) can be reported by Health Care Professionals (HCPs; e.g., physicians, pharmacists) and non-Health Care Professionals (non-HCPs; e.g., consumers). Previous studies investigating differences between reports from HCPs and non-HCPs rarely considered the completeness of information provided. In addition, they mostly did not distinguish between physicians and pharmacists or were performed years ago. The aim of our study was to analyse and compare the completeness of information provided in reports from physicians, pharmacists and consumers from Germany in a more recent dataset. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe analysed all spontaneous reports from Germany received between 2018 and 2021 in the ADR database EudraVigilance exclusively reported by physicians (n = 69,976), pharmacists (n = 42,396) or consumers (n = 121,144). Demographical parameters of the patients were analysed descriptively. Completeness of reports was evaluated applying an established score (vigiGrade). Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using logistic regression analysis in order to identify report, patient, drug or ADR-specific information provided more often in reports from physicians, pharmacists or consumers.

resultsWithin the study period the number of reports per year by physicians and pharmacists decreased steadily, while an opposite trend was observed for consumer reports. The proportion of female patients was higher in reports from pharmacists (64.4%) and consumers (64.8%) compared to those from physicians (55.3%). On average, patients in reports from pharmacists (58.7) were older compared to those from physicians (53.5) and consumers (52.6). As an example for the presence of specific information, the time to onset of the ADR could be calculated more often in consumer compared to physician (OR 1.9 [1.8-1.9]) and pharmacist reports (OR 1.7 [1.6-1.7]). In contrast, pharmacist (OR 0.5 [0.4-0.5]) and consumer (OR 0.5 [0.5-0.5]) reports included the indication of the suspected drug less often than physician reports. Physician reports on average (mean = 0.5) were slightly more complete according to the vigiGrade score compared to reports from consumers (mean = 0.4) and pharmacists (mean = 0.4).

conclusionThe ADR reports from consumers were comparable with regard to the completeness score with those from physicians and pharmacists underlining their value. Differences in completeness of specific information between the reporter types were found, suggesting that a common reporting of interactions between the three reporters may further improve the completeness of ADR reports. Furthermore, stratified analysis of ADR reports per reporter type may be helpful for certain objectives in scientific research.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPhysiciansAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansPharmacists

Identifiers

PMID37987966
PMCPMC10684666
OpenAlexW4388862652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.