ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
From Product-Quality Complaints to Patient-Safety Triage: A Structured Narrative Review and Proposed PRCS-TRACE Framework.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Product-quality complaints are usually handled as pharmaceutical quality-system events, yet defects in sterility, potency, identity, packaging, labelling, storage, distribution or delivery-device function may affect medication use, treatment continuity and patient outcomes. This structured narrative review examines product-quality complaints (PQCs) as a patient-safety interface linking pharmaceutical quality systems, pharmacovigilance, medication-error prevention, recall action and pharmacoepidemiology. Existing pharmacovigilance, quality-management and recall systems address different components of this pathway, but no integrated framework was identified in the sources reviewed that specifies how product-quality complaints should be linked to exposure evidence and patient outcomes. Sources were identified through targeted PubMed searches and purposive retrieval of official regulatory, pharmacovigilance and public-health documents up to 5 June 2026; the review was not registered and included no quantitative synthesis. The sources identified concentrate on regulatory architecture, sentinel contamination events and shortage-associated harms; routine complaints are studied comparatively little, and no source identified reported the complaint-to-defect-to-exposure-to-outcome cascade with a complaint-level denominator. We propose the term patient-relevant complaint status (PRCS) for a complaint warranting patient-safety triage because the reported defect could plausibly affect exposure, sterility, potency, identity, delivery, medication use or treatment continuity, together with a TRACE workflow, a six-level clinical-consequence classification and separately graded certainty for defect confirmation, patient exposure and outcome attribution. These tools are proposed, unvalidated and hypothesis-generating; they do not convert complaints into adverse reactions, recalls into causality or spontaneous reports into incidence. Their intended role is to structure patient-safety triage, batch-aware linkage, exposure reconstruction, clinical follow-up and proportionate mitigation while causal attribution remains incomplete; this role requires prospective validation before routine implementation.
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.