Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39259332›Full record

SynthesisNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025

Barriers in reporting adverse effects of medical devices: a literature review.

Sukhpreet Kaur, Ayush Gandhi, Sahibjot Kaur Sandhu, Ashish Baldi

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Clinical significance of field safety notices concerning implantable pacemakers and defibrillators.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
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.

Sukhpreet KaurDasmesh College of Pharmacy, Faridkot, Punjab, India.
Ayush GandhiDasmesh College of Pharmacy, Faridkot, Punjab, India.
Sahibjot Kaur SandhuShri Guru Ram Das College of Medical Sciences and Research, Amritsar, Punjab, India.
Ashish BaldiPharma Innovation Lab, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technology, Maharaja Ranjit Singh Punjab Technical University, Bathinda, Punjab, India. baldiashish@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical devices play an essential role in the delivery of healthcare but its use is not entirely risk free. There are several instances where it causes mortality or morbidity among users. It is important to evaluate the risks involved at every stage of its application to bring improvement in the standard of healthcare. For the purpose Materiovigilance Program of India was launched on July 6, 2015. Despite these efforts, available data suggests that reporting of adverse events is very low. The present study aims to identify barriers that influence the reporting of adverse events of medical devices and outline a strategy to overcome these barriers. Systemic review method has been adopted to achieve these ends. Thirty-one papers have been selected based on the inclusion criteria related to objective of the study. Lack of awareness, attitude, and resources are found to be major barriers at the individual level for not reporting adverse effects of medical devices. The organizational factors such as hierarchical set up, lack of time and incentives, and furthermore lack of industry responsiveness have been identified as prominent barriers to the reporting of adverse events. In order to improve the reporting level, it is important to make access and contact easier with the reporting system. Engaging healthcare professionals at various levels by acknowledging and appreciating their contribution. The adverse events of medical devices should not be restricted to physicians; only rather other health care professional such as nurses, pharmacists, and technicians should also be encouraged to report any adverse event of medical devices.

Indexed as

Equipment and SuppliesHumansAdverse eventsBarriersMateriovigilanceMedical devicesPharmacovigilanceRegulatory affairs

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.