ReviewDrug safety2026
Theoretical Framework and Key Considerations for Time-to-Onset Analysis in Spontaneous Reporting Systems.
Review in Drug safety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Spontaneous reporting databases play a central role in pharmacovigilance for monitoring the safety of drugs and vaccines. Conventional statistical signal detection has relied primarily on disproportionality analyses based on reporting frequencies, whereas information on the timing of adverse event onset has not been fully exploited. Time to onset (TTO), defined as the interval between the initiation of drug administration and the occurrence of an adverse event, provides complementary information that captures temporal patterns of event manifestation beyond simple occurrence counts. This review summarizes the definition, calculation, characteristics, and limitations of TTO analyses in spontaneous reporting databases and provides an overview of statistical signal detection methods incorporating TTO information. In particular, nonparametric distribution-comparison approaches, such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Anderson-Darling tests, are well suited to spontaneous reporting data, in which the underlying population and exposure size are unknown. These methods enable the detection of abnormalities in the temporal structure of adverse event onset that may not be identifiable through frequency-based analyses alone. Furthermore, disproportionality analysis and TTO-based approaches are not competing methods but complementary strategies that capture different dimensions of safety signals-reporting frequency and temporal patterns-and their combined use may improve both sensitivity and interpretability of signal detection. The review also discusses survival analysis-based methods and Weibull modeling for TTO data, outlining their theoretical background and applications while emphasizing their inherent limitations when applied to spontaneous reporting systems. Because of reporting bias, incomplete time information, and the absence of non-event cases, such methods should not be used to estimate population-level risks or to infer causality. In conclusion, TTO analyses using spontaneous reporting databases should be positioned as exploratory tools for characterizing onset patterns, generating hypotheses, and informing the design of subsequent epidemiological and safety studies, rather than as a direct basis for clinical or regulatory decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42118500What 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.