Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23072620›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2012

Global patterns of adverse drug reactions over a decade: analyses of spontaneous reports to VigiBase™.

Lise Aagaard, Johanna Strandell, Lars Melskens, Paw S G Petersen, Ebba Holme Hansen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 82 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Adverse drug reactions associated with doxorubicin and epirubicin: A descriptive analysis from VigiBase.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Lise AagaardInstitute of Public Health, Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. laagaard@health.sdu.dk
Johanna Strandell
Lars Melskens
Paw S G Petersen
Ebba Holme Hansen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough systems to collect information about suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were established in many countries and by the WHO in the 1960s, few studies have examined reported ADRs related to national income.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to characterize ADRs reported to the WHO-ADR database, VigiBase™, and to relate data to national income.

methodsWe analysed ADR reports submitted to VigiBase™ from 2000 to 2009 with respect to reporting rate, age and sex of patient, type, seriousness and medications. Reports were also analysed with respect to national income level, classified in accordance with the World Bank definition: low, lower-middle, upper-middle and high.

resultsWe analysed 1,359,067 ADR reports including 3,013,074 ADRs. Overall, 16% of reports were serious and 60% were reported for females. High-income countries had the highest ADR reporting rates (range 3-613 reports/million inhabitants/year) and low-income countries the lowest (range 0-21). Distribution of ADRs across income groups with respect to age group, seriousness and sex was non-significant. Overall, the majority of ADRs were reported for nervous system medications, followed by cardiovascular medicines. Low-income countries reported relatively more ADRs for antiinfectives for systemic use than high-income countries, and high-income countries reported more ADRs for antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents than lower-income groups.

conclusionThis study showed that high-income countries had the highest ADR reporting rates and low-income countries the lowest, with large variations across countries in each group. Significant differences in ADR reporting rates were only found for ADRs of the type 'skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders' and for the therapeutic groups 'antiinfectives for systemic use' and 'antineoplastic and immunomodulation agents'. To strengthen ADR reporting rates, especially in low-income countries, more research is needed about the impact of organizational structures and economic resources of national pharmacovigilance centres and ADR reporting practices on the large variations in ADR reporting rates within income groups.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPharmacovigilanceAdolescentAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID23072620

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.