↓ Skip to main content

Communication on Safety of Medicines in Europe: Current Practices and General Practitioners’ Awareness and Preferences

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Communication on Safety of Medicines in Europe: Current Practices and General Practitioners’ Awareness and Preferences
Published in
Drug Safety, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40264-017-0535-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sieta T. de Vries, Maartje J. M. van der Sar, Amelia Cupelli, Ilaria Baldelli, Anna Marie Coleman, Dolores Montero, Ivana Šipić, Adriana Andrić, Annika Wennberg, Jane Ahlqvist-Rastad, Petra Denig, Peter G. M. Mol, On behalf of SCOPE Work Package 6

Abstract

National competent authorities (NCAs) for medicines coordinate communication relating to the safety of medicines in Europe. The effectiveness of current communication practices has been questioned, particularly with regard to reaching general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this study was to assess current European NCA safety communication practices and to investigate European GPs' awareness of and preferences for safety communications on medicines. Web-based surveys were distributed among European NCAs and healthcare professionals (HCPs). The survey among regulators was emailed to a representative of each of the 27 European countries participating in the Strengthening Collaboration for Operating Pharmacovigilance in Europe (SCOPE) Joint Action. HCPs from nine European countries (Denmark, Spain, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK) were asked about their preferences through a link to the survey on websites, in newsletters, and/or in a direct email. From this survey, data from GPs were used and descriptive analyses were conducted. Current NCA practices were reported for 26 countries. In 23 countries (88%), NCAs published direct healthcare professional communications (DHPCs, i.e. urgent communication letters for serious safety issues) on their website in addition to distribution to individual HCPs. Educational materials were available on the NCA's website in 10 countries (40%), and 21 NCAs (81%) indicated they had their own bulletin/newsletter, which is often presented on the NCA's website (15 countries; 60%). More than 90% of the 1766 GPs who completed the survey were aware of DHPCs. The most preferred senders of safety information were NCAs and professional bodies, while the preferred channels for keeping up to date with safety information were medicines reference books and clinical guidelines. GPs found the repetition of safety issues useful (range of 80% in the UK to 97% in Italy). Preference for an electronic copy rather than a hardcopy varied per country (36% in Sweden to 72% in Spain). NCAs use similar methods for safety communications on medicines. Most GPs were aware of urgent communications and preferred similar senders of safety communications; however, their preferences towards the format differed per country.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Other 5 12%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#13,757,137
of 23,323,574 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#1,271
of 1,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,230
of 314,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#18
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,323,574 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.