The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fundamentals of medication error research
Abstract
Types of medication errors are defined, error detection techniques are described, and the validity of several medication error studies is evaluated. A medication error is generally defined as a deviation from the physician's medication order as written on the patient's chart. In hospitals, medication errors occur at a rate of about one per patient per day. A dispensing error is one made by pharmacy staff when distributing medications to nursing units or directly to patients in an ambulatory-care pharmacy; the error rates for doses dispensed via the cart-filling process range from 0.87% to 2.9%. Categories of medication errors should be operationally defined before an investigation, and any allowable deviations from the physician's order should be clearly stated. Fourteen error category definitions are presented. Methods for detecting medication errors include anonymous self-reports (questionnaires), incident reports, the critical-incident technique (analyses of a large number of individual errors to identify common causal factors), and direct observation (including the disguised-observation and participant observer techniques). Observation is the best error detection method in terms of accuracy. Results of medication error studies were examined for validity and classified into one of four categories: (A) results should be accepted as reported, (B) results overestimate or underestimate the truth by a known amount, (C) results overestimate the truth by an unknown amount, and (D) results should not be accepted. All studies examined for validity used observation as the error detection technique. The following guidelines for observation-based medication error studies were established: The observer should follow the subject to the patient's bedside, the observer should witness patient consumption of each dose, the observer should not be familiar with patient drug regimens before observation, operational definitions must be used, and having an error validation committee can be advantageous. Future studies are needed that focus on the identification and testing of new error prevention methods that use the techniques described.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events in Pediatric Inpatients
Kaushal, R. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.16.2114 · Cited by 1,917
The Impact of Computerized Physician Order Entry on Medication Error Prevention
Bates, D. W., Teich, J. M., Lee, J., Seger, D., Kuperman, G. J., Ma'Luf, N., Boyle, D., & Leape, L. (1999) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1999.00660313 · Cited by 1,260
Medication Errors Observed in 36 Health Care Facilities
Barker, K. N., Flynn, E. A., Pepper, G. A., Bates, D. W., & Mikeal, R. L. (2002) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.162.16.1897 · Cited by 773
Self-citationErrors in the medication process: frequency, type, and potential clinical consequences
Lisby, M. (2005) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzi015 · Cited by 367
Systematic Review of Medication Errors in Pediatric Patients
Ghaleb, M. A., Barber, N., Franklin, B. D., Yeung, V. W., Khaki, Z. F., & Wong, I. C. (2006) · Annals of Pharmacotherapy · doi:10.1345/aph.1g717 · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Allan, E. A., & Barker, K. N.
- Venue
- American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1990-03-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 555-571
- ISSN
- 1079-2082 (ISSN-L)
- 1535-2900
- OpenAlex
- W2259989678
- Cited by
- 354
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fundamentals of medication error research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ajhp/47.3.555
- The paper
- Allan, E. A., & Barker, K. N. (1990). Fundamentals of medication error research. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/47.3.555
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.