Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23028841›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Study of natural health product adverse reactions (SONAR): active surveillance of adverse events following concurrent natural health product and prescription drug use in community pharmacies.

Sunita Vohra, Kosta Cvijovic, Heather Boon, Brian C Foster, Walter Jaeger, Don LeGatt, George Cembrowski, Mano Murty, Ross T Tsuyuki, Joanne Barnes and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Guidance for establishing an integrative oncology service in the Australian healthcare setting-a discussion paper.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Natural health product-drug interaction tool: A scoping review.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2016
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. How well do pharmacists know their patients? A case report highlighting natural health product disclosure.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2013
    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

15 authors.

Sunita VohraComplementary and Alternative Research Program (CARE) for Integrative Health and Healing, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. CARE@med.ualberta.ca
Kosta Cvijovic
Heather Boon
Brian C Foster
Walter Jaeger
Don LeGatt
George Cembrowski
Mano Murty
Ross T Tsuyuki
Joanne Barnes
Theresa L Charrois
John T Arnason
Candace Necyk
Mark Ware
Rhonda J Rosychuk

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany consumers use natural health products (NHPs) concurrently with prescription medications. As NHP-related harms are under-reported through passive surveillance, the safety of concurrent NHP-drug use remains unknown. To conduct active surveillance in participating community pharmacies to identify adverse events related to concurrent NHP-prescription drug use. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsParticipating pharmacists asked individuals collecting prescription medications about (i) concurrent NHP/drug use in the previous three months and (ii) experiences of adverse events. If an adverse event was identified and if the patient provided written consent, a research pharmacist conducted a guided telephone interview to gather additional information after obtaining additional verbal consent and documenting so within the interview form. Over a total of 112 pharmacy weeks, 2615 patients were screened, of which 1037 (39.7%; 95% CI: 37.8% to 41.5%) reported concurrent NHP and prescription medication use. A total of 77 patients reported a possible AE (2.94%; 95% CI: 2.4% to 3.7%), which represents 7.4% of those using NHPs and prescription medications concurrently (95%CI: 6.0% to 9.2%). Of 15 patients available for an interview, 4 (26.7%: 95% CI: 4.3% to 49.0%) reported an AE that was determined to be "probably" due to NHP use. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Active surveillance markedly improves identification and reporting of adverse events associated with concurrent NHP-drug use. Although not without challenges, active surveillance is feasible and can generate adverse event data of sufficient quality to allow for meaningful adjudication to assess potential harms.

Indexed as

Herb-Drug InteractionsPharmacistsAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAgedBiological ProductsCanadaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPharmaciesPrescription DrugsPublic Health SurveillanceSurveys and QuestionnairesBiological ProductsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID23028841
PMCPMC3461007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.