Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40510928›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in drug safety2025

Pharmacovigilance processes in low- and middle-income countries: moving from data collection to data analysis and interpretation.

Olga Menang, Peter van Eeuwijk, Karen Maigetter, Andy Stergachis, Christian Burri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Olga MenangDepartment of Medicine, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Kreuzstrasse 2, Allschwil 4123, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3928-4288
Peter van EeuwijkDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7594-0166
Karen MaigetterDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0498-0803
Andy StergachisDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0057-6627
Christian BurriDepartment of Medicine, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5418-1984

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The analysis and interpretation of pharmacovigilance data is an essential component of the continuous benefit-risk assessment of authorised medicinal products. Effective pharmacovigilance data analysis starts with data collection and involves critical activities, such as signal detection, that enable the generation of new information on marketed products, and inform safety-related regulatory actions. This real-time pharmacovigilance data analysis, which requires efficient collaboration and exchange of information between the key pharmacovigilance stakeholders, represents a challenge for many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Design: We used a convergent parallel mixed-methods study design consisting of qualitative and quantitative methods. Methods: Qualitative and quantitative methods consisted of semi-structured interviews and an online survey, respectively. Quantitative research was complemented by cross-sectional analyses of the number of adverse event reports from LMIC in VigiBase Results: Nine key informants from eight countries were interviewed and 50 respondents from 34 countries completed the online survey. Four major themes emerged from the data and are proposed as transformative actions to strengthen pharmacovigilance data analysis and interpretation in LMIC: build on existing pharmacovigilance data analysis capacity rather than create new or parallel mechanisms; implement standardised procedures to enable efficient data analysis; augment the work of the safety committees by assigning pharmacovigilance staff to data analysis; and implement mechanisms that allow benefit-risk evaluation and decision-making. Conclusions: Findings from this research revealed that many LMIC have implemented procedures for reporting and collecting suspected adverse events, but a considerable proportion of the data collected is not analysed in-country due to a lack of requisite knowledge, processes and structures to support such analysis. Establishing the four essential elements proposed by this research will equip LMIC for efficient data analysis, thereby supporting consistent decision-making through pharmacovigilance.

Indexed as

analysisbenefit-risk evaluationdata collectiondecision-makinginterpretationlow- and middle-income countriespharmacovigilanceregulatory actionsafety

Identifiers

PMID40510928
PMCPMC12159475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.