↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge of Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting and the Pharmacovigilance of Biological Medicines: A Survey of Healthcare Professionals in Ireland

Overview of attention for article published in BioDrugs, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 419)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

16 tweeters


16 Dimensions

Readers on

63 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.
Knowledge of Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting and the Pharmacovigilance of Biological Medicines: A Survey of Healthcare Professionals in Ireland
Published in
BioDrugs, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40259-018-0281-6
Pubmed ID

J. O’Callaghan, B. T. Griffin, J. M. Morris, Margaret Bermingham


In Europe, changes to pharmacovigilance legislation, which include additional monitoring of medicines, aim to optimise adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting systems. The legislation also makes provisions related to the traceability of biological medicines. The objective of this study was to assess (i) knowledge and general experience of ADR reporting, (ii) knowledge, behaviours, and attitudes related to the pharmacovigilance of biologicals, and (iii) awareness of additional monitoring among healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Ireland. Hospital doctors (n = 88), general practitioners (GPs) (n = 197), nurses (n = 104) and pharmacists (n = 309) completed an online questionnaire. There were differences in mean knowledge scores relating to ADR reporting and the pharmacovigilance of biologicals among the HCP groups. The majority of HCPs who use biological medicines in their practice generally record biologicals by brand name but practice behaviours relating to batch number recording differed between some professions. HCPs consider batch number recording to be valuable but also regard it as being more difficult than brand name recording. Most respondents were aware of the concept of additional monitoring but awareness rates differed between some groups. Among those who knew about additional monitoring, there was higher awareness of the inverted black triangle symbol among pharmacists (> 86.4%) compared with hospital doctors (35.1%), GPs (35.6%), and nurses (14.9%). Hospital pharmacists had more experience and knowledge of ADR reporting than other practising HCPs. This study highlights the important role hospital pharmacists play in post-marketing surveillance. There is a need to increase pharmacovigilance awareness of biological medicines and improve systems to support their batch traceability.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Other 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Computer Science 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 19 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 05 June 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,040,510 outputs
Outputs from BioDrugs
of 419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 268,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioDrugs
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,040,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 419 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 268,512 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them