ReviewJournal of food and drug analysis2018
Risk undermined in the bilateral pharmaceutical regulatory system in Taiwan.
Review in Journal of food and drug analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shenmai-Yin decreased the clearance of nifedipine in rats: The involvement of time-dependent inhibition of nifedipine oxidation.Journal of food and drug analysis · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of Pharmacovigilance Planning and Risk Minimization Planning (PVP/RMP), initiated by the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH), addressed an important conceptual change from monitoring the safety of individual medicine to proactively conducting risk prevention for the minimization of medication error. However, the implementation of PVP/RMP is a challenge in societies like Taiwan where irrational medication and co-medication is prevalent. It is even more difficult in Taiwan where two regulatory bodies are governing pharmaceutical affairs, namely Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) in charge of Western Medicine (WM) and the Department of Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy (DCMP) in charge of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). There are thus dual-tract drug approval panels, two GMP controls and two independent adverse drug event reporting systems. This rendered irrational co-medication of WM and TCM undetectable and the standard tools for monitoring pharmacovigilance inapplicable. The bilateral regulatory system is conceptually unscientific in accordance with PVP/RMP and unethical from humanity point of view. The first part of this review delivers (1) social aspects of polypharmacy in Taiwan; (2) regulatory aspects of pharmaceutical administration; (3) risks undermined in the bilateral regulatory system and (4) pharmacoepidemiology in relation to the risk of polypharmacy. As evidence-based medicine (EBM) forms the fundamental risk-benefit assessment on medication, the second part of this review delivers (1) the scientific aspects of the beauty and the odds of biological system that governs host-xenobiotics interaction; (2) conceptual evolution from product management (pharmacovigilance) to risk management (PVP/RMP); (3) non-biased due process is essential for risk-benefit assessment on medicinal products and (4) the opinion of the authors on system building for safe medication.
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.