ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2022
Similarity and consistency assessment of three major online drug-drug interaction resources.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Computational approaches for drug-drug interaction prediction: a systematic review of data sources, modeling strategies, and evaluation frameworks.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Gaps in the detection of drug-drug interactions between antipsychotic and cardiometabolic medications: a multisource analysis.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Screening for Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Patients Receiving Anticoagulant Therapy: A Comparison of Three Drug Interaction Databases for Consistency in Severity Rating, Evidence Classification, and Clinical Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Standardizing and Comparing Management Recommendations for Potential Drug-Drug Interactions Across Different Interaction Checkers.Drug safety · 2026Article
- Analysis of drug-drug interactions between psychiatric drugs in spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports from EudraVigilance.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Managing High-Risk Drug Interactions With Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir: Experience From a Dedicated Pharmacology Advice Service.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Closing the loop: human-augmented, mechanistically enhanced AI for proactive management of drug-drug interactions.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- A Dose-Aware Model for Revealing Dose-Risk Relationship of Drug-Drug Interaction.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Analysis of drug-drug interactions in spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports from EudraVigilance focusing on psychiatric drugs and somatic medication.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- medicX-KG: a knowledge graph for pharmacists' drug information needs.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2025Article
- Patients in Clinical Trials are Sub-Optimally Protected for Drug-Drug Interactions: A Call for Action.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- A comparison of five different drug-drug interaction checkers for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Analysis of queries to a Swedish drug information centre identifies scientific knowledge gaps.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Agreement of Different Drug-Drug Interaction Checkers for Proton Pump Inhibitors.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Drug-drug interactions with oral anticoagulants: information consistency assessment of three commonly used online drug interactions databases in Switzerland.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Clinical Relevance of Drug-Drug Interactions With Antibiotics as Listed in a National Medication Formulary: Results From Two Large Population-Based Case-Control Studies in Patients Aged 65-100 Years Using Linked English Primary Care and Hospital Data.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2023Article
- Similarity and consistency assessment of three major online drug-drug interaction resources.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Medication related to pigmentation of oral mucosa.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2022Review
- Drug-Drug-Gene Interactions in Cardiovascular Medicine.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Inconsistent Reporting of Interactions Between Warfarin and Medicinal Plants Across Clinical Decision Support Resources.Journal of evidence-based integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this study was to explore the level of agreement on drug-drug interaction (DDI) information listed in three major online drug information resources (DIRs) in terms of: (1) interacting drug pairs; (2) severity rating; (3) evidence rating; and (4) clinical management recommendations.
methodsWe extracted information from the British National Formulary (BNF), Thesaurus and Micromedex. Following drug name normalisation, we estimated the overlap of the DIRs in terms of DDI. We annotated clinical management recommendations either manually, where possible, or through application of a machine learning algorithm.
resultsThe DIRs contained 51 481 (BNF), 38 037 (Thesaurus) and 65 446 (Micromedex) drug pairs involved in DDIs. The number of common DDIs across the three DIRs was 6970 (13.54% of BNF, 18.32% of Thesaurus and 10.65% of Micromedex). Micromedex and Thesaurus overall showed higher levels of similarity in their severity ratings, while the BNF agreed more with Micromedex on the critical severity ratings and with Thesaurus on the least significant ones. Evidence rating agreement between BNF and Micromedex was generally poor. Variation in clinical management recommendations was also identified, with some categories (i.e., Monitor and Adjust dose) showing higher levels of agreement compared to others (i.e., Use with caution, Wash-out, Modify administration).
conclusionsThere is considerable variation in the DDIs included in the examined DIRs, together with variability in categorisation of severity and clinical advice given. DDIs labelled as critical were more likely to appear in multiple DIRs. Such variability in information could have deleterious consequences for patient safety, and there is a need for harmonisation and standardisation.
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.