Evidence Hub

Prevalence and types of prescribing errors made by non-medical prescribers in health care settings globally: a systematic review protocol

Koskiniemi S, Syyrilä T, Jukarainen L, Franklin BD, Mykkänen M, Jylhä V, Härkänen M

JBI evidence synthesis, 2026

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this systematic review will be to establish the prevalence and types of prescribing errors made by non-medical prescribers in health care.

Introduction: Prescribing errors are common, but the existing literature mostly focuses on medical prescribers. In many countries, legislation allows non-medical health care professionals to prescribe; however, there has been no systematic review of non-medical prescribing errors.

Eligibility criteria: This review will include quantitative studies of all designs investigating the prevalence of prescribing errors related to any disease, medication, or patient group made by non-medical prescribers in all health care settings globally.

Methods: This systematic review will include a Study Within a Review. We will use JBI methodology for systematic reviews, particularly the guidelines for prevalence estimate reviews. An information specialist will conduct standard database searches using PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. Two researchers will perform a parallel search using artificial intelligence software. Studies found through standard database searches and those found using artificial intelligence will be included if the 2 researchers independently decide that they meet the eligibility criteria after full-text screening. A comparison of the standard database search and artificial intelligence search will be reported in a separate Study Within a Review. Two researchers will…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free