ArticleDrug safety2020
Evaluation of a Web-Based, 'Purchase Event' Intensive Monitoring Method for Pharmacovigilance of Natural Health Products: Lessons and Insights from Development Work in New Zealand.
Article in Drug safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consumer Views on the Role of the Natural Health Products (NHPs) Industry in Pharmacovigilance for NHPs: A Qualitative Study in New Zealand.Drug safety · 2026Article
- A Scoping Review of Published Literature on the Contributions of the Natural Health Products (NHPs) Industry to Pharmacovigilance for NHPs.Drug safety · 2026Article
- Research on Quality Evaluation of Product Interactive Aging Design Based on Kano Model.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
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
Abstract
introductionIntensive monitoring methods are used in pharmacovigilance for prescription medicines but have not yet been implemented for natural health products (NHPs).
objectivesOur objective was to assess feasibility issues with a new 'purchase event' intensive monitoring method for pharmacovigilance of NHPs, including pharmacy and NHP purchaser recruitment rates, collection of NHP purchaser key patient identifier information for data linkage and quality and completeness of data.
methodsFor the Ginkgo study, 213 community pharmacies in the Auckland (Aotearoa New Zealand) District Health Board area were invited to participate. Staff in participating pharmacies (n = 3 [1.4%]) recorded ginkgo product sales and gave purchasers a study invitation card (October 2015-January 2016). Ginkgo purchaser participants were emailed links to web-based baseline and follow-up questionnaires about adverse events occurring during/after taking ginkgo. Participating pharmacists and consumers were invited to provide qualitative feedback about the study. For the NHP-Lite study, all NHPs were included for monitoring. Community pharmacies in the Green Cross Health network were invited to participate. Participating pharmacy staff gave all NHP purchasers a study invitation card over a 2-week period (May 2016). NHP purchaser participants were emailed links to web-based baseline, follow-up and feedback questionnaires.
resultsFew community pharmacists (Ginkgo study, n = 3; NHP-Lite study, n = 18) and NHP purchasers (Ginkgo study, n = 0; NHP-Lite study, n = 4) participated. Pharmacists (Ginkgo study, 3/3; NHP-Lite study, 11/18) described several reasons for participating and suggested ways to increase consumer recruitment, including simplifying study procedures.
conclusionsThese web-based, purchase event, intensive monitoring studies, with cohorts built through NHP purchases in pharmacies, identified substantial issues with recruiting pharmacists/pharmacies and NHP purchasers that, at present, render such studies unfeasible. Future studies need to consider other methods of recruiting NHP purchasers and develop a simple method for recording NHP purchases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32596765What 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.