ReviewAustralian prescriber2024
Pharmacovigilance in Australia: how do adverse event reports from clinicians contribute to medicine and vaccine safety?
Review in Australian prescriber, 2024. 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.
- Governing AI for Pharmacovigilance in Low-Income Countries: Systems Perspective.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Pharmacovigilance study and development of a clinical decision flowchart for personalized selection of trastuzumab, T-DXd, and T-DM1 in breast cancer patients.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Adverse Events and Drug Interactions Associated with Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor Treatment: A Descriptive Study Across Australian, Canadian, and American Adverse Event Databases.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Reporting adverse events (adverse drug reactions) associated with medicines and vaccines assists with identifying previously unrecognised side effects and other safety concerns. Reporting adverse events to the Therapeutic Goods Administration is mandatory for sponsors (pharmaceutical companies), and strongly encouraged but voluntary for healthcare professionals and consumers. Adverse events should be reported even when causality is uncertain, as reports may contribute to identification of a safety signal for new or uncommon events. Suspected adverse events associated with new medicines and vaccines (registered in the last 5 years), and medicines included in the Black Triangle Scheme, should be prioritised for reporting. For other medicines, serious adverse events and unexpected adverse events should be prioritised. The Therapeutic Goods Administration analyses adverse event reporting data and uses signal detection methods to identify and evaluate emerging safety signals, which may lead to regulatory actions and communication to address safety issues.
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.