OBJECTIVE To comprehensively evaluate the quality of adverse drug reaction （ADR） reports in clinical departments or ward （hereinafter referred to as “department”） based on game theory combinatorial weighting-technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution （TOPSIS）-rank-sum ratio （RSR） method， providing a reference for the further standardization of ADR reporting. METHODS Based on relevant documents and scoring criteria， the ADR report quality evaluation standards previously developed by our team were modified. Using game theory principles， the fusion of subjective and objective weights for each indicator was determined. A game theory combinatorial weighting-TOPSIS-RSR model was developed to evaluate and categorize the quality of raw ADR reports submitted by departments to the pharmacy department at Bozhou Hospital of Anhui Medical University. RESULTS A total of 222 ADR reports from 23 departments were included. The game theory combinatorial weighting method identifies weak points in management， such as ADR symptoms and signs， the description of underlying diseases， timing of ADR， by optimizing the weightings of the indicators. The TOPSIS-RSR method calculates that the mean relative closeness of the departments was 0.401 7， indicating that the overall report quality ranged from moderate to substandard. 20095） Three departments， including neurosurgery， demonstrated medium reporting quality [estinate closeness （Ĉ）i ≥0.506]， while two departments， such as the respiratory department，were rated as unqualified （Ĉi＜0.278）. The remaining departments were all deemed qualified （0.278≤ Ĉi＜0.506）. CONCLUSIONS The developed game theory combinatorial weighting-TOPSIS-RSR method provides an effective approach for the quality evaluation of ADR reports， which not only balances subjective and objective weights but also facilitates comparisons among different departments. There is still room for improvement in the ADR report quality at the hospital.