ReviewExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2026
Automated dispensing cabinets and nurse-related medication errors in inpatient settings: A systematic review.
Review in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Automated Dispensing Cabinets (ADCs) are computerized medication storage and dispensing systems increasingly used in inpatient hospital settings to support safe medication administration. As nurses represent the final point of medication delivery to patients, understanding the impact of ADCs on nurse-related medication errors is critical. This systematic review aimed to assess the association between ADC implementation and medication errors involving nurses in inpatient hospital settings. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar identified 16 eligible studies published between 2008 and 2025 from 184 retrieved records. Included studies employed quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods designs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and findings were synthesized narratively due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures. Results: Across quantitative studies, ADC implementation was generally associated with reductions in reported medication errors, particularly omission errors and wrong drug or wrong dose events, although reported reductions varied widely. Some studies reported maintenance of previously low error rates. Qualitative findings described perceived improvements in workflow efficiency, medication access, and nurses' confidence in medication safety, alongside temporary workflow challenges during early implementation. Conclusions: Overall, the evidence suggests that ADCs may support safer medication administration and nursing workflows when appropriately implemented. However, evidence quality is limited by largely observational designs, heterogeneous error definitions, and inconsistent outcome reporting, highlighting the need for more standardized and methodologically robust research.
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.