Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24643967›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2014

The Weber effect and the United States Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS): analysis of sixty-two drugs approved from 2006 to 2010.

Keith B Hoffman, Mo Dimbil, Colin B Erdman, Nicholas P Tatonetti, Brian M Overstreet

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 102 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing 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

102 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. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. National Poison Center Trends in GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Exposures Following FDA Approval for Weight Loss.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Keith B HoffmanAdverseEvents, Inc., 3663 N. Laughlin Road, Suite 102, Santa Rosa, CA, 95403, USA, keith@adverseevents.com.
Mo Dimbil
Colin B Erdman
Nicholas P Tatonetti
Brian M Overstreet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe United States Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) consists of adverse event (AE) reports linked to approved drugs. The database is widely used to support post-marketing safety surveillance programs. Sometimes cited as a limitation to the usefulness of FAERS, however, is the 'Weber effect,' which is often summarized by stating that AE reporting peaks at the end of the second year after a regulatory authority approves a drug. Weber described this effect in 1984 based upon a single class of medications prescribed in the United Kingdom. Since that time, the FDA has made a concerted effort to improve both reporting and the database itself. Both volume and quality of AE reporting has dramatically improved since Weber's report, with an estimated 800,000 yearly reports now being logged into FAERS.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine if current FAERS reporting follows the trend described by Weber.

methodsSixty-two drugs approved by the FDA between 2006 and 2010 were included in this analysis. Publicly available FAERS data were used to assess the 'primary suspect' AE reporting pattern for up to a 4-year period following each drug's approval date.

resultsA total of 334,984 AE reports were logged into FAERS for the 62 drugs analyzed here. While a few of the drugs demonstrated what could be considered 'Weber effect' curves, a majority of the drugs showed little evidence for the effect. In fact, the general AE reporting pattern observed in this study appears to consist simply of increasing case counts over the first three quarters after approval followed by relatively constant counts thereafter.

conclusionsOur results suggest that most of the modern adverse event reporting into FAERS does not follow the pattern described by Weber. Factors that may have contributed to this finding include large increases in the volume of AE reports since the Weber effect was described, as well as a concerted effort by the FDA to increase awareness regarding the utility of post-marketing AE reporting.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDatabases, FactualDrug ApprovalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

PMID24643967
PMCPMC3975089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.