Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40650501›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine

An e-Reporting Tool for Facilitating Submission of Veterinary Adverse Drug Reaction Reports.

Heather Davies, Steven Smyth, Gina Pinchbeck, Munir Pirmohamed, Roy Savory, P J Noble, David Killick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Heather DaviesInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6905-4718
Steven SmythInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Gina PinchbeckInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Munir PirmohamedInstitute of Systems Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Roy SavoryPharmacovigilance Unit, Veterinary Medicines Directorate, Addlestone, UK.
P J NobleInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
David KillickInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

Veterinary Medicines Directorate VM0541Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 204822/z/16/z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse events (AEs) are under-reported in veterinary medicine. The ability to report AEs directly from the practice management system (PMS) has been suggested to facilitate reporting. The Small Animal Veterinary Surveillance Network (SAVSNET) informatics system provides an opportunity to integrate reporting into the workflow such that reports can be submitted directly to the National Competent Authority, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD).

objectivesDevelop an AE reporting form linked to the PMS allowing for pre-population of some fields from the electronic health record (EHR). Analyze the quality of submitted reports. ANIMALS: Animals attending United Kingdom (UK) first-opinion veterinary practices participating in SAVSNET.

methodsAn AE "reporting button" was developed and available in the normal clinical workflow for SAVSNET enrolled practices using the Robovet PMS. The button facilitated capture of pertinent information relating to AEs, including the ability to append clinical notes from the associated EHR. After submission, reports were automatically submitted daily to the VMD. Report quality was assessed using an adapted version of the vigiGrade scoring system, which was used to compare the quality of reports submitted to the VMD via standard routes to those submitted via SAVSNET. Assessment of reports submitted via SAVSNET, was conducted twice. First, considering only information contained in the report and second, considering information contained in both the report and associated clinical notes.

resultsSixty reports were submitted during the first 18 months by 42 different veterinary practices. The quality of SAVSNET reports was significantly improved by information contained within the clinical notes. These reports were more likely to be well-documented than those submitted via standard routes. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Adverse event reports populated using EHR data are well documented and can support efficient reporting of AEs in veterinary medicine.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsVeterinary DrugsVeterinary MedicineAnimalsElectronic Health RecordsUnited KingdomVeterinary Drugsadverse drug reactionelectronic health recordsinformaticspharmacovigilanceveterinary medicine

Identifiers

PMID40650501
PMCPMC12254882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.