ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Trends in adverse drug reaction reporting in eight selected countries after the implementation of new pharmacovigilance regulation in 2012: a joinpoint regression analysis.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do consumers and healthcare professionals report the same adverse event differently? A paired analysis of duplicate vaccine safety reports in Norway.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Physicians' gender and specialty in relation to adverse drug reaction reporting in Sweden.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Observational
- Global patterns and trends in spontaneous reporting systems: VigiBase, FAERS, VAERS, and JADER.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven pharmacovigilance analysis of polypharmacy and adverse events in breast cancer survivors treated with antidepressants.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Gel-Phase Microextraction Using Microfluidic-Directed Ultrashort Peptide Assemblies for the Determination of Drugs in Oral Fluids.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeUnderreporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remains to be a challenge in modern health care. Major reforms in the EU pharmacovigilance system in 2012 introduced the legal basis for consumers to report suspected ADRs. This study was designed to determine trends in overall ADR reporting, the ratio of health care professional (HCP)-to-consumer ADR reporting, and the ratio of serious-to-nonserious ADR reporting for an 11-year period in the selected non-EU and EU countries that had implemented systems for consumers' reporting before the 2012 EU pharmacovigilance legislation and those that did not have. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe national competent authorities of 15 countries (11 EU countries, former EU member the UK, Australia, Canada, and the USA) were contacted via e-mail and asked to provide the total number of ADR reports, numbers of ADRs reported by consumers and HCPs, numbers of serious and nonserious ADRs, and top 5 medication groups causing ADRs by the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system during the period of 2012-2022. Eight countries, namely Belgium, Canada, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and the UK, responded and provided the data. The trends of ADR reporting were evaluated with the joinpoint regression analysis method. The annual percent change (APC) and the average annual percent change (AAPC) were estimated.
resultsOver the study period, the overall rates of ADR reporting increased significantly in all the countries except for Belgium, with the greatest AAPC being in Lithuania (AAPC of 32.34) and the lowest, in Canada (AAPC of 10.3). The ratios of HCP-to-consumer ADR reporting were significantly decreasing in all the countries (AAPC range, -43.7 to -24.9) except for Canada where an opposite significant trend toward an increasing HCP reporting rate (AAPC of 3.9) for 2012-2020 was observed. The ratios of serious-to-nonserious ADR reporting were significantly decreasing in more than half of the countries, namely Canada, Finland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, and Portugal, with the greatest negative AAPC being in Lithuania (AAPC of -32.9) and the smallest, in Canada (AAPC of -6.8). Vaccines (J07), immunosuppressants (L04), antineoplastic agents (L01), antibacterials for systemic use (J01), and antithrombotic agents (B01) were found to be the top 5 most frequently reported medications.
conclusionsThis study shows the significant upward trends in overall ADR reporting not only in the countries that implemented consumer ADR reporting systems after the 2012 EU pharmacovigilance legislation but also in countries that had consumer reporting systems before 2012. Moreover, significant downward trends in the ratios of HCP-to-consumer ADR reporting were documented for all EU countries, confirming increasing consumers' involvement in ADR reporting. Further, larger scale studies with the involvement of more countries are needed to better understand the trends in ADR reporting, and multifaceted interventions are warranted to be installed to enhance ADR reporting.
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.