ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018
Does patient reporting lead to earlier detection of drug safety signals? A retrospective comparison of time to reporting between patients and healthcare professionals in a global database.
Article in British 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 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do consumers and healthcare professionals report the same adverse event differently? A paired analysis of duplicate vaccine safety reports in Norway.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Development and pilot evaluation of an electronic trigger-based surveillance model for sedative-hypnotic drug misuse in a tertiary hospital.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A real-world pharmacovigilance study of dacomitinib based on FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Real-world pharmacovigilance assessment of meropenem-associated adverse events: age stratification and time-to-onset analysis using FAERS.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- An analysis of awareness and acceptability of the Medicines Side Effect Reporting Form for Consumer and the quality of data entered by consumers - An Indian perspective.Indian journal of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Analysis of adverse drug events as a way to improve cancer patient care.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2023Observational
- Signals of Adverse Drug Reactions Communicated by Pharmacovigilance Stakeholders: A Scoping Review of the Global Literature.Drug safety · 2023Article
- Pharmacovigilance in China: Evolution and future challenges.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Review
- Patient involvement in pharmacovigilance: determinants and evolution of reporting from 2011 to 2020 in France.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Patient-centered pharmacovigilance: priority actions from the inherited bleeding disorders community.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2023Review
- Praziquantel and Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Hepatic Schistosomiasis: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2021Article
- Reported adverse drug reactions in women and men: Aggregated evidence from globally collected individual case reports during half a century.EClinicalMedicine · 2019Article
- Does patient reporting lead to earlier detection of drug safety signals? A retrospective comparison of time to reporting between patients and healthcare professionals in a global database.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Analysis of a pharmacist-led adverse drug event management model for pharmacovigilance in an academic medical center hospital in China.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo explore if there is a difference between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in time to reporting drug-adverse drug reaction (ADR) associations that led to drug safety signals.
methodsThis was a retrospective comparison of time to reporting selected drug-ADR associations which led to drug safety signals between patients and HCPs. ADR reports were selected from the World Health Organization Global database of individual case safety reports, VigiBase. Reports were selected based on drug-ADR associations of actual drug safety signals. Primary outcome was the difference in time to reporting between patients and HCPs. The date of the first report for each individual signal was used as time zero. The difference in time between the date of the reports and time zero was calculated. Statistical differences in timing were analysed on the corresponding survival curves using a Mann-Whitney U test.
resultsIn total, 2822 reports were included, of which 52.7% were patient reports, with a median of 25% for all included signals. For all signals, median time to signal detection was 10.4 years. Overall, HCPs reported earlier than patients: median 7.0 vs. 8.3 years (P < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients contributed a large proportion of reports on drug-ADR pairs that eventually became signals. HCPs reported 1.3 year earlier than patients. These findings strengthen the evidence on the value of patient reporting in signal detection and highlight an opportunity to encourage patients to report suspected ADRs even earlier in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.