Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29255992›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2018

Adverse drug reaction reporting: how can drug consumption information add to analyses using spontaneous reports?

Kristian Svendsen, Kjell H Halvorsen, Solveig Vorren, Hilde Samdal, Beate Garcia

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Adverse Drug Reactions in Norway: A Systematic Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kristian SvendsenTromsø Hospital Pharmacy, University Hospital of North Norway, N-9038, Tromsø, Norway. kristian.0411@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3481-3539
Kjell H HalvorsenDepartment of Pharmacy, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Solveig VorrenRegional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centre (RELIS), University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Hilde SamdalNorwegian Medicines Agency, Oslo, Norway.
Beate GarciaTromsø Hospital Pharmacy, University Hospital of North Norway, N-9038, Tromsø, Norway.
University Hospital of North Norway · NODirektoratet for medisinske produkter · NOUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSpontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is a cornerstone in pharmacovigilance. However, information about the underlying consumption of drugs is rarely used when analysing spontaneous reports. The purpose of this study was to combine ADR reports with drug consumption data to demonstrate the additional information this gives in various scenarios, comparing different drugs, gender-stratified sub-populations and changes in reporting over time.

methodsWe combined all Norwegian ADR reports in 2004-2013 from the EudraVigilance database (n = 14.028) with dispensing data from the Norwegian Prescription Database (more than 800 million dispensed prescriptions during 2004-2013). This was done in order to calculate drug-specific consumption-adjusted adverse drug reaction reporting rates (CADRRs) by dividing the number of reports for each drug with the number of users of the drug during the same time period.

resultsAmong the ten drugs with the highest number of ADR reports and the ten drugs with the highest CADRR, only four drugs were in both categories. This indicates that drugs with a high number of reports often also have a high number of users and that CADRR captures drugs with potentially relevant safety issues but a smaller number of users. Comparing reported ADRs in females and males using methylphenidate, we found that the two groups report different ADRs. Finally, we showed that changes in ADR reporting for simvastatin and atorvastatin during 2004-2013 were due to changes in consumption and that atorvastatin had a higher CADRR but fewer reports than simvastatin.

conclusionsCADRR provides additional information compared with number of reports alone in studies using spontaneous reports. It is important for researchers to adjust for consumption whenever possible in pharmacovigilance studies.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDrug Utilization ReviewPharmaceutical ServicesPharmacovigilanceAtorvastatinCentral Nervous System StimulantsDatabases, FactualDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMaleMethylphenidateNorwayRisk FactorsSex FactorsAtorvastatinCentral Nervous System StimulantsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMethylphenidateSimvastatinAdverse drug reactionsDrug consumptionEudraVigilanceNorwayPharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID29255992
OpenAlexW2776535386

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.