ArticleDrug safety2025
Adverse Drug Events in Ambulatory Care: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Drug safety, 2025. 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.
- Uncharted territory: assessing antibiotic adverse drug events from walk-in clinics at an academic healthcare system.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Article
- Standard Elements in Studies of Adverse Events and Medical Error (SESAME): explanation and elaboration.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdverse drug events (ADEs) are understudied in the ambulatory care setting. We aim to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of ADEs in outpatient care using electronic health records (EHRs).
methodsThis cross-sectional study included EHR data for patients who had an outpatient encounter at an academic medical center from 1 October 2018 through 31 December 2019. We developed a stratified sampling strategy based on a comprehensive set of 994 ADE-related International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) codes to identify clinical encounters and notes likely to contain ADEs. Within each ICD-10 likelihood group, clinical notes were randomly sampled and annotated for present or possible ADE-drug relationships and severity. The overall estimated population prevalence of ADEs presenting in the outpatient setting was calculated. The generalizability of the findings was assessed by comparing ICD-10 code frequencies against a large commercial database.
resultsThe study included 3126 notes (unique patient encounters) from 2882 unique patients. Of these, 1383 patient encounters (44.2%) had a present or possible ADE documented (6308 mentions). Of the 6038 ADEs mentioned, 14.1% were hypersensitivity reactions, 1.1% were life-threatening, 22.4% were serious, and 60.4% were significant. Main causal agents included anti-infectives (19.3%), central nervous system agents (12.8%), and cardiovascular agents (11.5%). The overall prevalence of present ADEs mentioned in the clinical notes was estimated to be 1.97 per 100 patient encounters (or 2.52 per 100 patient encounters when possible ADEs are included).
conclusionsThis study identified the overall population prevalence per encounter of ADEs in the outpatient population by leveraging ICD-10 codes and investigating ADEs documented in clinical notes. Understanding the ADE characteristics in a large corpus of outpatient documentation advances pharmacovigilance knowledge, enhancing the detection, monitoring, and prevention of ADEs in ambulatory care.
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.