SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2024
Improving adverse drug event reporting by healthcare professionals.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Empowering citizens to spontaneously report suspected adverse drug reaction: Systematic literature review of interventions and their impact.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Causes of medication errors in community pharmacies: A meta-ethnography and systematic review.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- Improving adverse drug event reporting by healthcare professionals.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- 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.Current drug safety · 2024Pooled it
- Adverse drug reaction reporting with the Med Safety app in Uganda: a cluster-randomised, controlled trial.The Lancet. Global health · 2025Trial
- Using Natural Language Processing to Identify Adverse Drug Events Characterized by Medication Replacement in Primary Care Electronic Medical Records: Algorithm and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Adverse Events Associated with Clascoterone: A Real-World Pharmacovigilance Study of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- VigiBase: Resource Profile Update with a Summary of Global Patterns and Trends in Adverse Event Reports for Medicines and Vaccines.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Trends in adverse drug reaction reporting by dentists: a 15-year analysis of German pharmacovigilance data.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Barriers to Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Among Physicians, Nurses, and Pharmacists: A Scoping Review Comparing High-Income Versus Low-/Middle-Income Countries.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Analysis of adverse drug reactions reported at a teaching hospital in 2023-24.Journal of postgraduate medicine · 2026Observational
- Navigating Medical Device Safety: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Regulatory Directions.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Pharmacovigilance profiles of three generations of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and network toxicology analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Strengthening pharmacovigilance through patient reporting: a scoping review of awareness, barriers, and facilitators.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Review
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice of pharmacovigilance among healthcare professionals at a tertiary level hospital, Sudan: a cross sectional study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, practices towards medication errors and adverse drug reactions reporting among healthcare professionals in Dongola, Sudan: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Diverging Safety Signals: A Trend Analysis of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions Reporting for Spinal Muscular Atrophy Therapies in the European Union.Neurology international · 2025Article
- The use of international classification of diseases codes to identify hospital admissions linked with adverse drug events: Validation study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Predicting clozapine-induced adverse drug reaction biomarkers using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
backgroundAdverse drug events, encompassing both adverse drug reactions and medication errors, pose a significant threat to health, leading to illness and, in severe cases, death. Timely and voluntary reporting of adverse drug events by healthcare professionals plays a crucial role in mitigating the morbidity and mortality linked to unexpected reactions and improper medication usage.
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of different interventions aimed at healthcare professionals to improve the reporting of adverse drug events. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and several other electronic databases and trials registers, including ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP, from inception until 14 October 2022. We also screened reference lists in the included studies and relevant systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials, non-randomised controlled studies, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies (ITS) and repeated measures studies, assessing the effect of any intervention aimed at healthcare professionals and designed to increase adverse drug event reporting. Eligible comparators were healthcare professionals' usual reporting practice or a different intervention or interventions designed to improve adverse drug event reporting rate. We excluded studies of interventions targeted at adverse event reporting following immunisation. Our primary outcome measures were the total number of adverse drug event reports (including both adverse drug reaction reports and medication error reports) and the number of false adverse drug event reports (encompassing both adverse drug reaction reports and medication error reports) submitted by healthcare professionals. Secondary outcomes were the number of serious, high-causality, unexpected or previously unknown, and new drug-related adverse drug event reports submitted by healthcare professionals. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. We extracted and reanalysed ITS study data and imputed treatment effect estimates (including standard errors or confidence intervals) for the randomised studies. MAIN
resultsWe included 15 studies (eight RCTs, six ITS, and one non-randomised cross-over study) with approximately 62,389 participants. All studies were conducted in high-income countries in large tertiary care hospitals. There was a high risk of performance bias in the controlled studies due to the nature of the interventions. None of the ITS studies had a control arm, so we could not be sure of the detected effects being independent of other changes. None of the studies reported on the number of false adverse drug event reports submitted. There is low-certainty evidence suggesting that an education session, together with reminder card and adverse drug reaction (ADR) report form, may substantially improve the rate of ADR reporting by healthcare professionals when compared to usual practice (i.e. spontaneous reporting with or without some training provided by regional pharmacosurveillance units). These educational interventions increased the number of ADR reports in total (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.90; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), serious ADR reports (RR 3.30, 95% CI 1.51 to 7.21; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), high-causality ADR reports (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 5.57; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), unexpected ADR reports (RR 4.72, 95% CI 1.75 to 12.76; 4 studies, 15,085 participants) and new drug-related ADR reports (RR 8.68, 95% CI 3.40 to 22.13; 2 studies, 7884 participants). Additionally, low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual practice (i.e. spontaneous reporting), making it easier to report ADRs by using a standardised discharge form with added ADR items may slightly improve the total number of ADR reports submitted (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.83; 1 study, 5967 participants). The discharge form tested was based on the 'Diagnosis Related Groups' (DRG) system for recording patient diagnoses, and the medical and surgical procedures received during their hospital stay. Due to very low-certainty evidence, we do not know if the following interventions have any effect on the total number of adverse drug event reports (including both ADR and ME reports) submitted by healthcare professionals: - sending informational letters or emails to GPs and nurses; - multifaceted interventions, including financial and non-financial incentives, fines, education and reminder cards; - implementing government regulations together with financial incentives; - including ADR report forms in quarterly bulletins and prescription pads; - providing a hyperlink to the reporting form in hospitals' electronic patient records; - improving the reporting method by re-engineering a web-based electronic error reporting system; - the presence of a clinical pharmacist in a hospital setting actively identifying adverse drug events and advocating for the identification and reporting of adverse drug events. AUTHORS'
conclusionsCompared to usual practice (i.e. spontaneous reporting with or without some training from regional pharmacosurveillance units), low-certainty evidence suggests that the number of ADR reports submitted may substantially increase following an education session, paired with reminder card and ADR report form, and may slightly increase with the use of a standardised discharge form method that makes it easier for healthcare professionals to report ADRs. The evidence for other interventions identified in this review, such as informational letters or emails and financial incentives, is uncertain. Future studies need to assess the benefits (increase in the number of adverse drug event reports) and harms (increase in the number of false adverse drug event reports) of any intervention designed to improve healthcare professionals' reporting of adverse drug events. Interventions to increase the number of submitted adverse drug event reports that are suitable for use in low- and middle-income countries should be developed and rigorously evaluated.
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.