ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2024
Consumers' knowledge and experiences of adverse drug reaction reporting in Australia: a national survey.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consumers' experiences and perspectives on reporting adverse drug reactions using digital tools: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes and Sources of Information About Adverse Drug Reactions-A Survey Study Among Patients and Healthcare Professionals in Poland.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2026Article
- Strengthening pharmacovigilance through patient reporting: a scoping review of awareness, barriers, and facilitators.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Review
- Completeness of spontaneously reported adverse drug reactions in 4 databases.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Pregnant Women and Vaccine Safety in Uganda: Knowledge, Barriers, and Opportunities for Engagement.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Completeness of Spontaneously Reported Adverse Drug Reactions by Consumers, Healthcare Professionals, and Pharmaceutical Companies: An Evaluation of Databases From Two High-Income Countries.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2025Article
- Consumer views on the use of digital tools for reporting adverse drug reactions: a cross-sectional study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Co-Designing a Consumer-Focused Digital Reporting Health Platform to Improve Adverse Medicine Event Reporting: Protocol for a Multimethod Research Project (the ReMedi Project).JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Pharmacovigilance in Australia: how do adverse event reports from clinicians contribute to medicine and vaccine safety?Australian prescriber · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the current knowledge and experiences of consumers in Australia on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting and their reasons for reporting or not reporting ADRs, with a focus on the use of digital tools for ADR reporting.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted among adults who had taken medicine in Australia. A structured questionnaire with multiple choice or Likert scale responses with an option for participants to provide free-text responses and pretested for face validity was used. Consumer characteristics, knowledge, and ADR reporting practices were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.
resultsA total of 544 survey responses were included in the analysis. The majority of respondents were women (68%), and 22% were aged between 65 and 74 years. Fifty-eight percent (n = 317) of respondents knew that they could report ADRs to either the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Three-quarters (n = 405) of respondents stated that they had experienced an ADR; of these, 36% reported an ADR to either the TGA, state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Among those who reported ADRs, 58% were unaware that they could use digital tools to report ADRs. The main reason for not reporting was that they did not think the ADR was serious enough to report (39%).
conclusionOver half of consumers knew that they could report ADR; however, improved consumer awareness about using digital tools for ADR reporting and increased ADR reporting is needed.
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.