Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32180152›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2020

US Food and Drug Administration Safety Advisories and Reporting to the Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Thomas J Moore, Richard L Morrow, Colin R Dormuth, Barbara Mintzes

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Thomas J MooreInstitute for Safe Medication Practices, 916 Prince Street, Suite 102, Alexandria, VA, 22314, USA. tmoore@ismp.org.ORCID 0000-0003-0994-836X
Richard L MorrowDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Colin R DormuthDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Barbara MintzesFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sidney Charles Perkins Center and School of Pharmacy, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

CIHR CIHR PJT-153275
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other major regulators regularly issue safety advisories about licensed drugs with new adverse effects that have been documented through observational studies, clinical trials, and spontaneously reported adverse drug events.

objectiveTo assess the possible effects of a representative group of FDA Drug Safety Communications on the reporting of the specific adverse effect featured in the advisory on new cases reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

methodsWe examined 16 FDA Drug Safety Communications issued from 2010 to 2015 that had not previously been the focus of advisories from regulators in the UK, Canada, or Australia. We compared the reports of the adverse effect in the 8 calendar quarters preceding the advisory and in the 4 quarters following. We measured change in reporting frequency by calculating the event reporting odds ratio (ROR) for the post-warning compared to the pre-warning periods. We defined a credible association of the advisory with increased reporting as a ROR ≥ 2.0 and p value of < 0.05 by Fisher's Exact Test.

resultsWe found statistically significant increased reporting for 4/16 advisories with RORs that ranged from 3.9 to 40.6. Three advisories had smaller but still statistically significant increases that were less than the ROR ≥ 2.0 threshold. For 7 advisories, we found no statistically significant changes in reporting.

conclusionsNo consistent pattern or effect was found on spontaneous reporting following these safety advisories. After results were available, we observed that some cases with the largest reporting increase also involved substantial numbers of legal claims. Changes in adverse event reporting following a warning need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAustraliaCanadaHealth CommunicationPatient SafetyUnited KingdomUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

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.