ArticleDrug safety2012
Selected national pharmacovigilance websites: an analysis of contents.
Article in Drug safety, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The potential of the internet.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmacovigilance involves the detection, assessment, understanding, and prevention of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), nationally and internationally. Effective communication, which relies increasingly on the Internet, is a crucial aspect of pharmacovigilance activities.
aimThe aim of this study was to perform an exploratory survey of national pharmacovigilance websites and compare their contents.
methodsOf 99 international pharmacovigilance organizations known to us (listed in the Side Effects of Drugs Annual 30), 45 included website addresses and 35 provided some or all of the information in English. We reviewed 10 of these 35 websites in order to identify their contents. The 10 sites that we selected contained the most extensive information on pharmacovigilance of those that we were able to access. Reviewing these sites, we identified 32 items of information that we used to assess the scope of each website systematically, using a scoring system based on the presence or absence of those items.
resultsAll the websites gave clear descriptions of national pharmacovigilance requirements and the reporting systems for ADRs, and all included devices. Beyond this, there was great variability in content from site to site. Few websites allowed access to raw pharmacovigilance data, such as individual case reports.
conclusionsOnline drug safety communication from the selected national websites we examined is highly variable from site to site, although a wider study is needed to confirm this. Agreement on the key components of pharmacovigilance websites would facilitate the development of a standardized format to improve online communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.