ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2012
Pharmacovigilance.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysing lithium, quetiapine and valproic acid on social media: an infodemiology study.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2025Article
- Pharmacovigilance - Technological Advancements, Recent Developments and Innovations.Current drug safety · 2025Review
- Safety and Tolerability of Nintedanib in Patients with Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Diseases: Post-marketing Data.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Regional insights on tobacco-related tweets: unveiling user opinions and usage patterns.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Language-agnostic pharmacovigilant text mining to elicit side effects from clinical notes and hospital medication records.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2022Article
- Awareness, knowledge, and attitude toward adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting among healthcare professionals in Ghana.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2022Article
- Veterinary pharmacovigilance in Europe: a survey of veterinary practitioners.Veterinary record open · 2017Article
- Article
- Detection of cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy associated with new biologicals and targeted cancer therapies from the FDA's adverse event reporting system.Expert opinion on drug safety · 2016Article
- Detection of signals of abuse and dependence applying disproportionality analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Article
- Characterization of hypersensitivity reactions reported among Andrographis paniculata users in Thailand using Health Product Vigilance Center (HPVC) database.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2014Article
- Pharmacovigilance and drug safety in Calabria (Italy): 2012 adverse events analysis.Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics · 2013Article
- Characterization of Statin-Associated Myopathy Case Reports in Thailand Using the Health Product Vigilance Center Database.Drug safety · 2013Article
- Signal detection to identify serious adverse events (neuropsychiatric events) in travelers taking mefloquine for chemoprophylaxis of malaria.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adverse drug reactions are the fifth most frequent cause of deaths in developed countries, effectively a global epidemic. However, progress in ameliorating the problem has been slow. Pharmacovigilance currently operates without clear objectives in relation to individual decisions, with no protocol (although risk management plans are a great step forward), with obscure materials and methods used for making decisions, with very limited reasoning and discussion, and little or no follow up and audit of the results. Problems include under-reporting, poor quality reports, underuse of the latest communications technology and suboptimal individual feedback to reporters. Assessment of causality is poor, impeding decision-making. After signal detection, more active measures to assess the risk to public health are needed. Other essential factors include precision about the ways in which data are prepared and transformed into databases, the recognition of secondary effects, which may be more obvious than the primary effect, but not so easy to link causally, and cognisance of all kinds of interactions. Areas that should be developed include pharmacoepidemiology, knowledge finding (through data mining), and communication and systems technology. The general way forward seems clear: a rigorous way of documenting all the steps, from getting reports of harms into regulatory databases to assessing their effects on public health, is essential and should be publicly reviewed for weaknesses. In turn, matters would be much improved by input on benefit/harm perceptions from patient groups, influencing decisions about what should be the true targets for regulatory and pharmacovigilance activities, avoiding second guessing by regulators.
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.