Date Approved


Date Posted


Degree Type

Open Access Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department or School

Health Sciences

Committee Member

Irwin G. Martin, Ph.D, Chair

Committee Member

Stephen A. Sonstein, Ph.D, Member


The present pilot study aims to compare the knowledge pertaining to ADR reporting systems that government doctors and private practitioners gained in a random, tier-II city in India, by conducting a questionnaire based survey. Their knowledge of ADR reporting, related guidelines and/or regulations, the frequency of ADRs they observe and diagnose, their opinion on mandatory reporting by doctors, type of ADRs they would generally report, and to whom ADRs should be reported are discussed besides evaluating the attributable reasons for underreporting, if any. A total of 47 (21.36%) responded to this random survey, of whom 27 (57.4%) were government doctors and 14 (29.7%) were private practitioners. Interestingly, 68.2% of doctors from either groups liked the idea of ADR reporting being made mandatory for doctors. The Chi-square test turned out to be significant with χ²= 26.729, p < 0.05, indicating there exists a difference between government doctors and private practitioners regarding the types of ADRs they would generally report. Lack of time, unavailability of ADR reporting forms, and system of reporting being too bureaucratic were cited as reasons for underreporting of ADRs. Creating awareness, among doctors of both groups, about ADR reporting via CME programs, offering incentives to reporters, and establishing ADR monitoring and reporting systems in hospitals and clinics under the supervision of pharmacists will help improve ADR reporting in this selected tier-II city of Warangal, in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India.