Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29218682›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2018

The RIMES Statement: A Checklist to Assess the Quality of Studies Evaluating Risk Minimization Programs for Medicinal Products.

Meredith Y Smith, Andrea Russell, Priya Bahri, Peter G M Mol, Sarah Frise, Emily Freeman, Elaine H Morrato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2018. 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
–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

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

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

7 authors.

Meredith Y SmithGlobal Patient Safety and Labeling, Amgen Inc., One Amgen Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320, USA. mersmith@amgen.com.
Andrea RussellGlobal Patient Safety and Labeling, Amgen Inc., One Amgen Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320, USA.
Priya BahriEuropean Medicines Agency, 30 Churchill Place, London, E14 5EU, UK.
Peter G M MolDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sarah FriseAstra Zeneca, Mississauga, ON, Canada.
Emily FreemanPharmacovigilance and Patient Safety, AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Elaine H MorratoDepartment of Health Systems, Management and Policy, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPharmaceutical risk minimization programs involve interventions designed to support safe and appropriate use of medicines. Currently, information regarding the evaluation of these programs is not publicly reported in a standardized and transparent manner. To address this gap, we developed and piloted a quality reporting checklist entitled the Reporting recommendations Intended for pharmaceutical risk Minimization Evaluation Studies (RIMES).

methodsChecklist development was guided by three sources: (1) a theoretical framework derived from program theory and process evaluation; (2) public health intervention design and evaluation principles; and (3) a review of existing quality reporting checklists. Two raters independently reviewed 10 recently published (2012-2016) risk minimization program evaluation studies using the proposed checklist. Inter-rater reliability of the checklist was assessed using Cohen's Kappa and Gwet's AC1.

resultsA 43-item checklist was generated. Results indicated substantial inter-rater reliability overall (κ = 0.65, AC1 = 0.65) and for three (key information, design and evaluation) of the four subscales (κ ≥ 0.64, AC1 ≥ 0.64). The fourth subscale (implementation) showed low reliability based on Cohen's Kappa, but substantial reliability based on the AC1 (κ = 0.17, AC1 = 0.61).

conclusionsThe RIMES statement augments relevant elements from existing quality reporting guidelines with items that address aspects of intervention design, implementation and evaluation specific to pharmaceutical risk minimization programs. Our results show that the RIMES statement reliably measures key dimensions of reporting quality. This tailored checklist is an important first step in improving the reporting quality of risk minimization evaluation studies and may ultimately help to improve the quality of these interventions themselves.

Indexed as

ChecklistDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsProgram EvaluationPublic HealthRiskPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID29218682
PMCPMC5878197

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.