ArticlePloS one2025
Drug-induced movement disorder: A disproportionality analysis using the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) from 2004 to 2024.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world safety profile of eravacycline compared with tigecycline, minocycline, and meropenem: a comparative pharmacovigilance analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Movement disorder emergencies at a tertiary-care center in West Bengal, India: Spectrum, etiologies, diagnostic implications.Next research · 2026Article
- Sex-specific pharmacovigilance signals and time-to-onset patterns of drug-related myoclonus and epileptic seizures: a real-world pharmacovigilance analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Adverse event profile of fondaparinux sodium: a disproportionality analysis based on FAERS, JADER, and VigiAccess databases.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough many drugs have been associated with drug-induced movement disorders (DIMDs), the associated risks are unclear. This study aimed to identify high-risk drugs for DIMDs through disproportionality analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database and to explore risk factors for DIMDs through sensitivity analysis.
methodsFour disproportionality analysis methods were used to assess the risk signals of drugs that may induce DIMDs from the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2024. One-way analyses, LASSO analyses, and logistic regression analyses were performed to explore the risk factors associated with DIMDs.
resultsThere are 138,081 reports related to DIMDs. This study identified 148 suspected drugs. Age under 33 years, male gender, and 62 medications, including METOCLOPRAMIDE, ARIPIPRAZOLE, CARBIDOPA, LEVODOPA, RISPERIDONE, and QUETIAPINE, are all independent risk factors for drug-induced movement disorders. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) reflecting model predictive accuracy was 0.724.
conclusionOur disproportionality analysis and sensitivity analysis of the FAERS database identified drugs potentially associated with DIMDs. These findings can provide valuable information for clinicians to be more cautious when prescribing these drugs and to monitor patients for the development of movement disorders closely. Additionally, the results can help regulatory agencies make informed decisions regarding the safety of drugs.
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.