Literature DB >> 10652971

The public health implications of the 1995 'pill scare'.

A Furedi1.   

Abstract

The warning issued by the UK Committee on Safety Medicines in October 1995, followed by their 'Dear Doctor' letter of October 18, 1995, that oral contraceptive pills containing gestodene or desogestrel were associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism has had a negative impact on public heath. A significant number of women either switched brands or ceased contraception altogether following the announcement. National data suggest a strong association between the pill scare and a substantial increase in the number of unintended pregnancies, particularly significant among younger women, with use of oral contraception falling from 40 to 27% of under 16s between 1995-1996 and 1996-1997. The resulting cost of the increase in births and abortions to the National Health Service has been estimated at about Pound Sterling 21 million for maternity care and from Pound Sterling 46 million for abortion provision. The level of risk should, in future, be more carefully assessed and advice more carefully presented in the interests of public health.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10652971     DOI: 10.1093/humupd/5.6.621

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod Update        ISSN: 1355-4786            Impact factor:   15.610


  14 in total

1.  Public pharmacovigilance communication: a process calling for evidence-based, objective-driven strategies.

Authors:  Priya Bahri
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  Making sense of health statistics.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 9.408

3.  Drug vs class-specific black box warnings: does one bad drug spoil the bunch?

Authors:  Stacie B Dusetzina; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Impact of medicines regulatory risk communications in the UK on prescribing and clinical outcomes: Systematic review, time series analysis and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Christopher J Weatherburn; Bruce Guthrie; Tobias Dreischulte; Daniel R Morales
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Measuring the impact of pharmacovigilance activities, challenging but important.

Authors:  Florence van Hunsel; Helga Gardarsdottir; Anthonius de Boer; Agnes Kant
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 6.  Impact of FDA drug risk communications on health care utilization and health behaviors: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stacie B Dusetzina; Ashley S Higashi; E Ray Dorsey; Rena Conti; Haiden A Huskamp; Shu Zhu; Craig F Garfield; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Multivariable analysis.

Authors:  Marlies Wakkee; Loes M Hollestein; Tamar Nijsten
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 8.551

8.  How to improve communication for the safe use of medicines?: Discussions on social marketing and patient-tailored approaches at the annual meetings of the WHO Programme for International Drug Monitoring.

Authors:  Priya Bahri; Mira Harrison-Woolrych
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Improving interpretation of publically reported statistics on health and healthcare: the Figure Interpretation Assessment Tool (FIAT-Health).

Authors:  Reinie G Gerrits; Dionne S Kringos; Michael J van den Berg; Niek S Klazinga
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2018-03-07

10.  Consumer Understanding, Preferences, and Responses to Different Versions of Drug Safety Messages in the United States: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Lauren McCormack; R Craig Lefebvre; Carla Bann; Olivia Taylor; Paula Rausch
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 5.606

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.