↓ Skip to main content

Economic impact of medication error: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Economic impact of medication error: a systematic review
Published in
Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety, March 2017
DOI 10.1002/pds.4188
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elaine K. Walsh, Christina Raae Hansen, Laura J. Sahm, Patricia M. Kearney, Edel Doherty, Colin P. Bradley

Abstract

Medication error is a significant source of morbidity and mortality among patients. Clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence are required for the implementation of quality of care interventions. Reduction of error-related cost is a key potential benefit of interventions addressing medication error. The aim of this review was to describe and quantify the economic burden associated with medication error. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, EconLit, ABI/INFORM, Business Source Complete were searched. Studies published 2004-2016 assessing the economic impact of medication error were included. Cost values were expressed in Euro 2015. A narrative synthesis was performed. A total of 4572 articles were identified from database searching, and 16 were included in the review. One study met all applicable quality criteria. Fifteen studies expressed economic impact in monetary terms. Mean cost per error per study ranged from €2.58 to €111 727.08. Healthcare costs were used to measure economic impact in 15 of the included studies with one study measuring litigation costs. Four studies included costs incurred in primary care with the remaining 12 measuring hospital costs. Five studies looked at general medication error in a general population with 11 studies reporting the economic impact of an individual type of medication error or error within a specific patient population. Considerable variability existed between studies in terms of financial cost, patients, settings and errors included. Many were of poor quality. Assessment of economic impact was conducted predominantly in the hospital setting with little assessment of primary care impact. Limited parameters were used to establish economic impact. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 163 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 17%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 10%
Other 14 9%
Other 34 21%
Unknown 34 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 33 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 43 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,910,634
of 18,873,384 outputs
Outputs from Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety
#142
of 1,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,843
of 270,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,873,384 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 270,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.