Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27330379›Full record

ReviewSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2016

Dilemmas of the causality assessment tools in the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions.

Lateef M Khan, Sameer E Al-Harthi, Abdel-Moneim M Osman, Mai A Alim A Sattar, Ahmed S Ali

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 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. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Lateef M KhanDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.
Sameer E Al-HarthiDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.
Abdel-Moneim M OsmanDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia; National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt.
Mai A Alim A SattarDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia; Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Ahmed S AliDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceBasic essence of Pharmacovigilance is prevention of ADRs and its precise diagnosis is crucially a primary step, which still remains a challenge among clinicians.

objectiveThis study is undertaken with the objective to scrutinize and offer a notion of commonly used as well as recently developed methods of causality assessment tools for the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions and discuss their pros and cons. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Overall 49 studies were recognized for all assessment methods with five major decisive factors of causality evaluation, all the information regarding reasons allocating causality, the advantages and limitations of the appraisal methods were extracted and scrutinized.

findingsFrom epidemiological information a past prospect is designed and subsequent possibility merged this background information with a clue in the individual case to crop up with an approximation of causation. Expert judgment is typically based on the decisive factor on which algorithms are based, nevertheless in imprecise manner. The probabilistic methods use the similar principle; however connect probabilities to each measure. Such approaches are quite skeptical and liable to generate cloudy causation results. Causation is quite intricate to ascertain than correlation in Pharmacovigilance due to numerous inherent shortcomings in causality assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We suggest that there is a need to develop a high quality assessment tool which can meticulously establish suitable diagnostic criteria for ADRs with universal acceptance to improvise the fundamental aspect of drug safety and evade the impending ADRs with the motive to convert Pharmacovigilance into a state of art.

Indexed as

Adverse drug reactionsAlgorithmsCausality assessment toolsPharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID27330379
PMCPMC4908100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.