Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40595769›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

MDDC: An R and Python package for adverse event identification in pharmacovigilance data.

Anran Liu, Raktim Mukhopadhyay, Marianthi Markatou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anran Liu *Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.
Raktim Mukhopadhyay *Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.
Marianthi MarkatouDepartment of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA. markatou@buffalo.edu.

Funding

U.S. Food and Drug Administration BAA 75F40120C00159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The safety of medical products continues to be a significant health concern worldwide. Spontaneous reporting systems (SRS) and pharmacovigilance databases are essential tools for postmarketing surveillance of medical products. Various SRS are employed globally, such as the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), EudraVigilance, and VigiBase. In the pharmacovigilance literature, numerous methods have been proposed to assess product-adverse event pairs for potential signals. In this paper, we introduce an R and Python package that implements a novel pattern discovery method for postmarketing adverse event identification, named Modified Detecting Deviating Cells (MDDC). The package also includes a data generation function that considers adverse events as groups, as well as additional utility functions. We illustrate the usage of the package through the analysis of real datasets derived from the FAERS database.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPharmacovigilanceSoftwareDatabases, FactualHumansUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAdverse eventsModified deviating data cells (MDDC) algorithmPattern discoveryPharmacovigilancePublic healthSoftware

Identifiers

PMID40595769
PMCPMC12219432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.