Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38989832›Full record

SynthesisCurrent drug safety2024

An Awareness of Pharmacovigilance Among Healthcare Professionals Due to an Underreporting of Adverse Drug Reactions Issue: A Systematic Review of the Current State, Obstacles, and Strategy.

Risani Andalasia Putri, Zullies Ikawati, Fita Rahmawati, Nanang Munif Yasin

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current drug safety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Best available evidence for the management of oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions, with implications for hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Risani Andalasia PutriDepartment of Pharmacy, Dharmais National Cancer Hospital, RS, Kanker Dharmais, Jl. S. Parman Kav, 84 - 86, West Jakarta, Indonesia.
Zullies IkawatiDepartment of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Sekip Utara Street, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Fita RahmawatiDepartment of Pharmacy, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Bulaksumur, Caturtunggal, Kec. Depok, Kabupaten Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia.
Nanang Munif YasinDepartment of Pharmacy, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Bulaksumur, Caturtunggal, Kec. Depok, Kabupaten Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia.

Funding

Hibah Penelitian Disertasi Doktor [PDD] 089/E5/PG.02.00.PT/2022, 1868/UNI/DITLIT/Dit-Lit/PT.01.03/2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare professionals play an essential role in reporting adverse drug reactions as part of pharmacovigilance activities. However, adverse drug reactions reported by healthcare professionals remain low.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to investigate healthcare professionals' knowledge, awareness, attitude, and practice on pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting, explore the causes of the underreporting issue, and provide improvement strategies.

methodsThis systematic review was conducted using four electronic databases for original papers, including PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Scholar ID. Recent publications from 1st January 2012 to 31st December 2022 were selected. The following terms were used in the search: "awareness", "knowledge", "adverse drug reaction", "pharmacovigilance", "healthcare professional", and "underreporting factor". Articles were chosen, extracted, and reviewed by the two authors.

resultsTwenty-five studies were selected for systematic review. This review found that 24.8%-73.33% of healthcare professionals were unaware of the National Pharmacovigilance Center. Around 20%-95.7% of healthcare professionals have a positive attitude toward pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting, while 12%-60.8% of healthcare professionals have experience reporting any adverse drug reaction in their practice. The most frequently highlighted barriers to pharmacovigilance were a lack of awareness and knowledge regarding what, when, and to whom to report.

conclusionUnderreporting issues require immediate attention among healthcare professionals due to a lack of awareness and knowledge of pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting. Educational and training program interventions have been suggested by most studies to address these issues.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelPharmacovigilanceHumansADRHCPKAAPLOS.pharmacovigilanceunderreporting factors

Identifiers

PMID38989832
PMCPMC11327747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.