Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26267842›Full record

Observational studyDrug safety2015

Experiences and Lessons From Implementing Cohort Event Monitoring Programmes for Antimalarials in Four African Countries: Results of a Questionnaire-Based Survey.

Comfort Kunak Suku, Geraldine Hill, George Sabblah, Mimi Darko, George Muthuri, Edward Abwao, Jayesh Pandit, Adeline Ijeoma Osakwe, Cassandra Elagbaje, Priscilla Nyambayo and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Drug safety, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Comfort Kunak SukuNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Abuja, FCT, Nigeria. kunacom@yahoo.com.
Geraldine HillUppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC), Uppsala, Sweden.
George SabblahNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Food and Drug Authority (FDA), Accra, Ghana.
Mimi DarkoNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Food and Drug Authority (FDA), Accra, Ghana.
George MuthuriNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Pharmacy and Poison Board (PPB), Nairobi, Kenya.
Edward AbwaoNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Pharmacy and Poison Board (PPB), Nairobi, Kenya.
Jayesh PanditNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Pharmacy and Poison Board (PPB), Nairobi, Kenya.
Adeline Ijeoma OsakweNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Abuja, FCT, Nigeria.
Cassandra ElagbajeNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Abuja, FCT, Nigeria.
Priscilla NyambayoNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Medicine Control Authority of Zimbabwe (MCAZ), Harare, Zimbabwe.
Star KhozaNational Pharmacovigilance Centre, Medicine Control Authority of Zimbabwe (MCAZ), Harare, Zimbabwe.
Alexander N DodooWHO Collaborating Centre (WHO CC) for Advocacy and Training in Pharmacovigilance, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Shanthi Narayan PalSafety and Vigilance (SAV), WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
National Agency for the Control of AIDS · NGUniversity of Ghana · GHUniversity of Zimbabwe · ZWUppsala Monitoring Centre · SEZimbabwe National Water Authority · ZW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCohort event monitoring (CEM) is an intensive method of post-marketing surveillance for medicines safety. The method is based on prescription event monitoring, which began in the 1970s, and has since been adapted by WHO for monitoring the safety of medicines used in Public Health Programmes. CEM aims to capture all adverse events that occur in a defined group of patients after starting treatment with a specific medicine during the course of routine clinical practice.

objectiveThe aims of this study were to describe the experiences of National Pharmacovigilance Centres (NCs) that have used CEM to monitor artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for uncomplicated malaria in the African setting, to raise awareness of some of the challenges encountered during implementation and to highlight aspects of the method that require further consideration.

methodA questionnaire-based survey was conducted to capture the experiences of NCs that have implemented CEM for active post-marketing surveillance of antimalarial medicines in sub-Saharan Africa. Six NCs were identified as having implemented CEM programmes and were invited to participate in the survey; five NCs indicated willingness to participate and were sent the questionnaire to complete.

resultsFour NCs responded to the survey-Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe-providing information on the implementation of a total of six CEM programmes. Their experiences indicate that CEM has helped to build pharmacovigilance capacity within the participating NCs and at the monitoring sites, and that healthcare providers (HCPs) are generally willing to participate in implementing the CEM method. All of the programmes took longer than expected to complete: contributing factors included a prolonged enrolment period and unexpectedly slow data entry. All of the programmes exceeded their budget by 11.1-63.2 %. Data management was identified as a challenge for all participating NCs.

conclusionsThe reported experiences of four NCs that have undertaken CEM studies on ACTs indicate that CEM has helped to build pharmacovigilance capacity within NCs and monitoring sites and that HCPs are willing to participate in CEM programmes; however, the method was found to be labour intensive and data management was identified as a challenge. Reducing the workload associated with CEM, particularly in relation to data management, and integrating the method into the routine work of HCPs and NCs should be considered for future implementation.

Indexed as

PharmacovigilanceSurveys and QuestionnairesAntimalarialsCohort StudiesGhanaHumansKenyaNigeriaProspective StudiesZimbabweAntimalarials

Identifiers

PMID26267842
PMCPMC4608977
OpenAlexW1170688339

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.