Epidemiology of adverse drug reactions to antihypertensive, antithrombotic and antidiabetic medications among adult inpatients at a National Referral Hospital, Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Treatment for hypertension, thrombosis and type 2 diabetes mellitus is long term and usually requires a combination of drugs which increases the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). This study aimed to establish the prevalence at admission, incidence during hospitalization and characteristics of ADRs linked to antihypertensive, antithrombotic and antidiabetic drugs among adult inpatients in Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a previously assembled prospective cohort study in Uganda's Mulago National Referral Hospital. We reviewed the files of inpatients who received antihypertensive, antithrombotic and/or antidiabetic medications prior to and/or during hospitalization. The modified Schumock and Thornton Preventability Scale, the Division of AIDS Table for Grading the Severity of Adult and Paediatric Adverse Events and the World Health Organization - Uppsala Monitoring Centre seriousness criteria were used to characterize the ADRs. RESULTS: More than a quarter (27%, 42/155) of the inpatients experienced an ADR at admission or during hospitalization. The point prevalence of ADRs at admission was 8% (13/155) and the incidence of ADRs during hospitalization was 23% (36/155). Forty-one percent (35/86) of the ADRs were serious and the majority (59%, 51/86) were preventable. CONCLUSION: One in 13 inpatients experienced an ADR on admission and one in four experienced an ADR that developed during hospitalization. Clinicians ought to prescribe medicines with lower ADR risk profile for cardiovascular and/or diabetic patients whenever possible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".