Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27697815›Full record

ReviewClinical medicine (London, England)2016

Adverse drug reactions.

Jamie J Coleman, Sarah K Pontefract

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 147 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
147citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

147 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Analyzing Molecular Determinants of Nanodrugs' Cytotoxic Effects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Graph representation and learning for drug administration prediction.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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

2 authors.

Jamie J ColemanUniversity of Birmingham and honorary consultant physician, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK j.j.coleman@bham.ac.uk.
Sarah K PontefractUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain a challenge in modern healthcare, particularly given the increasing complexity of therapeutics, an ageing population and rising multimorbidity. This article summarises some of the key facts about ADRs and explores aspects relating to their prevention, diagnosis, reporting and management in current clinical practice.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsHumansPharmacovigilanceadverse drug reaction reporting systemsAdverse drug reactionsclinical pharmacologydrug-related side effects and adverse reactionspharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID27697815
PMCPMC6297296

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.