ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2025
Awareness and Attitudes Regarding Adverse Drug Events and Reporting in South Africa.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReporting of adverse drug events (ADEs), by consumers enhances medication-related risk surveillance, public awareness, and understanding of medicine safety. The aim of this study was to explore adults' awareness of ADEs, attitudes towards reporting and perceptions of their role in reporting ADEs in South Africa.
methodWe conducted a cross-sectional, analytical study in which adults residing in South Africa completed an online questionnaire. The data collected was analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics.
resultsWe received responses from 350 participants. Most participants (86.2%, n = 302; N = 350) reported having heard about ADEs and the majority of participants (94.4%, n = 301; N = 319) indicated that reporting of ADEs was important. The Med Safety App was not widely known (17.3%, n = 58; N = 336) while the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) was relatively well known (77.4%, n = 260; N = 336). Healthcare providers only educated 55.7% (n = 180; N = 323) of the participants about ADEs and only 50.5% (n = 163; N = 323) of the participants asked their healthcare providers about ADEs. Awareness regarding ADEs was significantly higher (p < 0.001) among healthcare professionals (HCPs) compared to non-healthcare professionals (non-HCP).
conclusionMost participants were aware of ADEs and agreed it was important to report ADEs although reporting tools, such as the Med Safety App, were not well known. We recommend awareness campaigns on reporting processes because this could improve consumer reporting of ADEs in South Africa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.