ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2026
Knowledge, Attitudes and Sources of Information About Adverse Drug Reactions-A Survey Study Among Patients and Healthcare Professionals in Poland.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Knowledge, Attitudes and Sources of Information About Adverse Drug Reactions-A Survey Study Among Patients and Healthcare Professionals in Poland.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur study aimed to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and information sources about adverse drug reactions (ADRs) among healthcare professionals (HCPs) and non-healthcare professionals (non-HCPs) in Poland.
methodsA self-administered questionnaire was designed in two versions (non-HCPs and HCPs). The questionnaire, available in electronic and paper format, was distributed between August 2023 and April 2024 using various means, including HCP and patient organisations, senior citizens centres, and community pharmacies. The anonymous survey included a series of statements regarding ADRs and single- and multiple-choice questions.
resultsAnswers collected from 981 non-HCPs and 481 HCPs were analysed. Most respondents correctly identified the essential aspect of the ADR definition regardless of their medical education (non-HCP, n = 700 (71.36%) vs. HCP, n = 346 (71.93%) p = 0.818). Still, few respondents in both groups identified additional elements of the definition, with less than one-third of HCP respondents believing an ADR can result from improper medication use (non-HCP, n = 338 (34.45%) vs. HCP, n = 128 (26.61%) p = 0.002). Most respondents did not identify a "common ADR" as defined in the current rules of communicating about the frequency of ADRs. Most respondents indicate a lack of specific information in summary of product characteristics or package leaflet, with only 15.46% (n = 226) stating that they believe nothing is missing from those resources.
conclusionsOur survey results show the need to effectively educate HCPs and non-HCPs on ADRs. Exploring ways to communicate about ADRs may help patients and HCPs better understand the risks of pharmacotherapy and their role in the pharma covigilance system.
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.