Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14640771›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2003

Issues related to monitoring the safety of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines.

Christine Bond, Philip Hannaford

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christine BondDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland. c.m.bond@abdn.ac.uk
Philip Hannaford
University of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharmaceutical advances over the past 50 years have benefited many people in terms of disease prevention and management. However, probably without exception, most pharmaceutical products can cause adverse consequences of varying severity and frequency. In the last 10 years, many medicines that were originally prescription only have now become available over the counter (OTC), either from pharmacies or other general retail outlets. The volume and value of OTC medicine sales have increased accordingly. These switches have been well regulated and based on clear criteria and evidence of safety. Benefits of the changes include increased convenience to patients, greater self-management of minor ailments and a reduction in government drug expenditure.However, there are important differences between medicines supplied OTC and on medical prescription. With OTC medicines there is generally less healthcare professional input into the recommendation or ongoing monitoring of use. There is an absence of records per se, or linkage to other medication records elsewhere, and most countries allow direct-to-consumer advertising of the product. Taken together these differences can result in inappropriate expectations, demand and use of the OTC medicines, with limited opportunity for ongoing patient follow-up and monitoring of safety. Methodologies for pharmacy-based epidemiological studies of OTC medicines need to be developed. Studies should be large enough to detect associations that might exist, and to consider other explanations for associations such as chance, bias or confounding. There have already been some pilot studies with encouraging results with respect to follow-up rates. Outcome data however have usually been self-reported and the studies have lacked a suitable comparison group. Purchasers and suppliers of OTC medicines should also be made aware of, and encouraged to use, existing systems for spontaneous reporting of suspected adverse events, such as the Yellow Card Scheme in the UK. While available OTC medicines are perceived to be generally safe, problems have occasionally arisen with some earlier switched products (e.g. terfenadine). There have also been concerns about some traditional herbal and homeopathic remedies such as St John's wort. While such adverse events are rare, they emphasise the need for healthcare professionals and the public to understand and manage such risks. Many doctors are unaware of the range of OTC preparations available, and therefore do not consider them as a possible cause of presenting symptoms. Neither do they take them into account when making a new prescribing decision. The public need to be aware that OTC medicines should be treated with the same care as prescribed medicines, and that advice on recommended dose, contraindications and interactions should be adhered to.

Indexed as

Product Surveillance, PostmarketingSafetyHumansNonprescription DrugsPharmacoepidemiologySelf MedicationNonprescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID14640771
OpenAlexW1976460112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.