ArticleScientific reports2026
A multicenter evaluation of patients' knowledge of adverse drug reactions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A good knowledge of adverse drug reaction (ADRs) is critical for early identification and prompt reporting, mitigating most of its associated health consequences. This study assessed patients’ knowledge of ADRs and its predictors. A cross-sectional survey of 1,075 patients of five selected tertiary health facilities in five regions of Nigeria was performed using a structured questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed using SPSS version 25 to determine ADR knowledge level and predictors of the knowledge at 95% confidence interval (p < 0.05). The study showed that 55.5% of respondents had good knowledge of ADRs, while 42.3% had fair knowledge. Residents in Abia State (95%CI = 1.578–4.471; AOR = 2.656; p < 0.001) and participants ≤ 20 years old (95%CI = 1.022–6.206; AOR = 2.518; p = 0.045) were twice more likely to have good knowledge of ADR. Similarly, patients who used prescribed medicines (95%CI = 1.233–2.657; AOR = 1.810; p = 0.002) were almost twice more likely to have good knowledge of ADR. Meanwhile, residence in Abuja (95%CI = 0.170-0.450; AOR = 0.277; p = 0.000) and Bauchi State (95%CI = 0.299-0.831; AOR = 0.499; p = 0.008) were less likely to have good knowledge of ADR. More than half of the Nigerian patients surveyed possessed good knowledge of ADRs and the observed knowledge was significantly predicted by the use of prescribed medicines and socio-demographic factors, particularly, age and State of residence. Therefore, interventions focusing on the observed factors would further improve ADR knowledge and enhance patient safety through early detection, reporting and prompt management.
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.