ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2024
Exploring the influencing factors of adverse drug reaction reporting among medical personnel: a COM-B model-based study.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nursing work environment and moral sensitivity as factors influencing nurses' safety behaviors: the mediating role of professional identity.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to identify the factors that influence medical workers' enthusiasm for reporting adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Understanding these factors is essential to implement targeted interventions that can improve and refine pharmacovigilance systems. Methods: We adopted the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model (COM-B) model as the theoretical framework and conducted qualitative research using in-depth interviews with clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators. 24 one-on-one interviews were conducted and audio-recorded. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and subjected to thematic analysis to uncover the key factors affecting ADR reporting among medical staff. Results: The participation included 24 healthcare workers from six different healthcare organisations. Analysis revealed that decreased motivation to report ADRs was due to inadequate judgment or inconsistent judgment criteria within the capability domain, poor awareness of ADRs and deficient communication skills within the psychological domain, unclear responsibilities within the motivation domain, and limited or no access to necessary resources within the opportunity domain. Facilitators of ADR reporting included sufficient cognitive and operational abilities, spontaneous and incentivized motivation, clear responsibilities and role expectations, and robust social support. Conclusion: There is a critical need to develop comprehensive interventions that address the identified factors influencing ADR reporting. By improving the motivation of medical staff to report ADRs, the pharmacovigilance system can be significantly improved.
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.