ArticlePharmacy practice
Type B adverse drug reactions reported by an immunoallergology department.
Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Severity and Management of Adverse Drug Reactions Reported by Patients and Healthcare Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Antibiotic allergy as a cause of hospitalization in adults: a hospital-based study in Ukraine.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCharacterization of the adverse drug reactions (ADR) reported by the immunoallergology department (IAD), Centro Hospitalar de São João (Porto), to the Northern Pharmacovigilance Centre (NPC).
methodsAn observational, descriptive and retrospective study was conducted, based in a spontaneous report system. Participants were all the patients from the IAD, with suspected ADR, reported to NPC by specialists after the study was completed.
resultsStudied population had a median age of 41 years, with the predominance of the female gender (73.2%). Allergic rhinitis and asthma were the most frequent comorbidities. All studied ADR were type B, 89.6% were serious, 86.4% unexpected and 2.6% associated with drugs that presented less than 2 years in the market. The most represented drug classes were the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (52.6%) and antibiotics (25.2%). Skin symptoms represented 61.2% of the reported complaints. About 52.9% of these ADR occurred in less than one hour after intake. The most frequent ADR treatment at the time of the reaction was drug interruption (86.2%), followed by the prescription of anti-histamines (42.2%).
conclusionsReported ADR to NPC by the Drug Alert Unit were mainly serious, unexpected, associated with NSAIDs and antibiotics and related with marketing authorization medicines older than two years. These results could be very useful to develop strategies to prevent the clinical and economic consequences of ADR.
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.