Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27224991›Full record

ReviewDer Internist2016

[Pharmacovigilance in Germany : It is about time].

A Douros, C Schaefer, R Kreutz, E Garbe

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Internist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A DourosInstitut für Klinische Pharmakologie und Toxikologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland. antonios.douros@charite.de.
C SchaeferInstitut für Klinische Pharmakologie und Toxikologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
R KreutzInstitut für Klinische Pharmakologie und Toxikologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
E GarbeKlinische Epidemiologie, Leibniz-Institut für Präventionsforschung und Epidemiologie - BIPS, Bremen, Deutschland.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DELeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPharmacovigilance is defined as the activities relating to the detection, assessment, and prevention of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Although its beginnings in Germany date back more than 50 years, a stagnation in this field has been observed lately.

objectivesDifferent tools of pharmacovigilance will be illustrated and the reasons for its stagnation in Germany will be elucidated. CURRENT DATA: Spontaneous reporting systems are an important tool in pharmacovigilance and are based on reports of ADRs from treating physicians, other healthcare professionals, or patients. Due to several weaknesses of spontaneous reporting systems such as underreporting, media bias, confounding by comorbidity or comedication, and due to the limited quality of the reports, the development of electronic healthcare databases was publicly funded in recent years so that they can be used for pharmacovigilance research. In the US different electronic healthcare databases were merged in a project sponsored by public means resulting in more than 193 million individuals. In Germany the establishment of large longitudinal databases was never conceived as a public duty and has not been implemented so far. Further attempts to use administrative healthcare data for pharmacovigilance purposes are severely restricted by the Code of Social Law (Section 75, Book 10). This situation has led to a stagnation in pharmacovigilance research in Germany.

conclusionsWithout publicly funded large longitudinal healthcare databases and an amendment of Section 75, Book 10, of the Code of Social Law, the use of healthcare data in pharmacovigilance research in Germany will remain a rarity. This could have negative effects on the medical care of the general population.

Indexed as

Mandatory ReportingPharmacovigilanceAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsElectronic Health RecordsGermanyHealth PolicyHumansAdverse drug reaction reporting systemsBenefit–risk assessmentDrug approvalElectronic healthcare databasesResearch, pharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID27224991
OpenAlexW2403909493

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.