ArticleRheumatology international2024
The temporal association between adverse drug reactions and antirheumatic drugs utilisation in Western Australia: a retrospective study from real-world data (1995-2015).
Article in Rheumatology international, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physicians' gender and specialty in relation to adverse drug reaction reporting in Sweden.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Observational
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAdverse drug reactions (ADRs) can result in morbidity, mortality, and higher healthcare costs. Given the limited information available on ADRs associated with antirheumatic medications, this study aims to analyse and compare ADR reporting for these drugs in the pharmacovigilance datasets of Western Australia (WA) and the United States (US).
methodsTherapeutic Goods Administration provided WA pharmacovigilance data of selected antirheumatic drugs to from 1995 to 2015. The proportional reporting ratio (PRR) for WA case reports was compared to corresponding USA pharmacovigilance data by assessing the disproportionality of each ADR. clinically significant or true ADRs were determined using the Evans 2001 criteria (n > 2, chi-square > 4, PRR > 2).
resultsA total of 232 reports were found in WA, mostly on sixty-nine women aged 45 to 69. Methotrexate, leflunomide, azathioprine, sulfasalazine, and infliximab had the highest reported ADRs, related to gastrointestinal disorders. Patients who used biological agents in WA had 2.7 times the likelihood of reporting true ADRs compared to conventional antirheumatic drugs. The ADR rates in the two datasets were comparable over the study period.
conclusionsThe PRR values of ADRs were consistent between WA and US databases. Methotrexate and infliximab use were commonly associated with ADR reports in WA females, with incidence rates comparable to the US; while patients using biological agents were more likely to report true ADRs than those on conventional antirheumatic drugs in WA.
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.