ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Global burden and trends of adverse effects of medical treatment, 1990-2021: an analysis from the global burden of disease study 2021.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adverse effects of medical treatment (AEMT) pose a significant global health concern, yet prior studies have mostly focused on specific adverse events or single countries, leaving the long-term global epidemiological patterns insufficiently characterized. As healthcare utilization grows, it is crucial to comprehensively quantify the global, regional, and national burden of AEMT and to forecast future trends for effective resource allocation and quality improvement. Methods: We utilized data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study 2021. AEMT were defined based on GBD criteria, and incidence, prevalence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) data were extracted. This study was stratified by age, gender, region and socio-demographic index (SDI), and estimated annual percentage change was used to assess the trends from 1990 to 2021. Based on SDI, we conducted health inequality analysis and used the Bayesian age-period-cohort model to predict the trend changes over the next 15 years. Results: Globally, there were 12,481,276 new cases of AEMT, with 122,330 deaths, resulting in 4,846,981 DALYs loss in 2021. The age-standardized incidence (ASIR) and prevalence rates (ASPR) worldwide were showing an upward trend, especially in high SDI regions. Both age-standardized mortality (ASMR) and DALYs rates (ASDR) showed a gradual decline during the study period, but they still carried a heavy burden in the low SDI regions (2021 ASDR: 3.71 [95% UI: 2.90 to 5.68] per 100,000 persons-year; 2021 ASR for DALYs: 150.37 [95% UI: 109.08 to 215.24] per 100,000 persons-year). Australasia demonstrated the highest ASIR and ASPR, while Western Sub-Saharan Africa showed the highest ASMR and ASDR. Health inequality analyses revealed that both absolute and relative inequalities of DALYs were narrowing. By 2036, it is forecast that ASIR will decrease to 72.33 (19.40-125.27) per 100,000 persons-year, and ASDR will decrease to 40.98 (21.52-60.43) per 100,000 persons-year. Conclusion: This study provided a comprehensive global, regional, and national assessment of the burden and inequality of AEMT over the past three decades, coupled with forecasts to 2036. The findings revealed distinct epidemiological patterns across SDI levels and regions, filling an important knowledge gap and offering evidence to guide healthcare safety strategies, medical education, and surveillance systems to further reduce the burden of AEMT worldwide.
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.