Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25005708›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2014

Zoo or savannah? Choice of training ground for evidence-based pharmacovigilance.

G Niklas Norén, Ola Caster, Kristina Juhlin, Marie Lindquist

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
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. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Predicting Adverse Drug-Drug Interactions with Neural Embedding of Semantic PredicationsAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Improving reproducibility by using high-throughput observational studies with empirical calibration.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

G Niklas NorénUppsala Monitoring Centre, WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, Box 1051, 751 40, Uppsala, Sweden, niklas.noren@who-umc.org.
Ola Caster
Kristina Juhlin
Marie Lindquist

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharmacovigilance seeks to detect and describe adverse drug reactions early. Ideally, we would like to see objective evidence that a chosen signal detection approach can be expected to be effective. The development and evaluation of evidence-based methods require benchmarks for signal detection performance, and recent years have seen unprecedented efforts to build such reference sets. Here, we argue that evaluation should be made against emerging and not established adverse drug reactions, and we present real-world examples that illustrate the relevance of this to pharmacovigilance methods development for both individual case reports and longitudinal health records. The establishment of broader reference sets of emerging safety signals must be made a top priority to achieve more effective pharmacovigilance methods development and evaluation.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsBenchmarkingEvidence-Based MedicineGlobal HealthHumansPharmacovigilance

Identifiers

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.