Literature DB >> 436353

Judgments of trained observers on adverse drug reactions.

S Blanc, P Leuenberger, J P Berger, E M Brooke, J L Schelling.   

Abstract

Patients (672) admitted to a department of medicine during five consecutive months were followed by an investigator who identified 110 clinical manifestations which could have been considered adverse drug reactions. From these, 42 were excluded because they did not correspond to the definition of adverse reaction or they were inadequately documented. The remaining 68 cases were submitted to three independent observers who had to reply to a series of questions; from these replies five degrees of probability for the reaction itself were deduced. Reactions (54; 49% of the manifestations reported) were considered as certain or probable by at least two observers, but only 27 rections of these (25%) were attributed to the same drug by all three observers. There was a low level of agreement between any two observers (paired agreement ratio: 0.6 to 0.7) and little difference of agreement between any one observer and each of the others (personal agreement ratio: 0.6 to 0.7).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 436353     DOI: 10.1002/cpt1979255part1493

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 0009-9236            Impact factor:   6.875


  16 in total

1.  Comparison of three methods (consensual expert judgement, algorithmic and probabilistic approaches) of causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: an assessment using reports made to a French pharmacovigilance centre.

Authors:  Hélène Théophile; Yannick Arimone; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Nicholas Moore; Annie Fourrier-Réglat; Françoise Haramburu; Bernard Bégaud
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  Comparison of three pharmacovigilance algorithms in the ICU setting: a retrospective and prospective evaluation of ADRs.

Authors:  Sandra L Kane-Gill; Elizabeth A Forsberg; Margaret M Verrico; Steven M Handler
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Agreement of expert judgment in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Yannick Arimone; Bernard Bégaud; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Annie Fourrier-Réglat; Nicholas Moore; Mathieu Molimard; Françoise Haramburu
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-04-13       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Can decisional algorithms replace global introspection in the individual causality assessment of spontaneously reported ADRs?

Authors:  Ana F Macedo; Francisco B Marques; Carlos F Ribeiro
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 5.  Methods for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Taofikat B Agbabiaka; Jelena Savović; Edzard Ernst
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Inter-expert agreement of seven criteria in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Yannick Arimone; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Françoise Haramburu; Mathieu Molimard; Nicholas Moore; Annie Fourrier-Réglat; Bernard Bégaud
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  Comparison of three methods (an updated logistic probabilistic method, the Naranjo and Liverpool algorithms) for the evaluation of routine pharmacovigilance case reports using consensual expert judgement as reference.

Authors:  Hélène Théophile; Manon André; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Yannick Arimone; Bernard Bégaud
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  Causal or casual? The role of causality assessment in pharmacovigilance.

Authors:  R H Meyboom; Y A Hekster; A C Egberts; F W Gribnau; I R Edwards
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Consistency of assessment of adverse drug reactions in psychiatric hospitals: a comparison of an algorithmic and an empirical approach.

Authors:  L G Schmidt; P Dirschedl; R Grohmann; J Scherer; O Wunderlich; B Müller-Oerlinghausen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.953

10.  Assessment of adverse drug reactions in psychiatric hospitals.

Authors:  R Grohmann; H Hippius; B Müller-Oerlinghausen; E Rüther; J Scherer; L G Schmidt; A Strauss; B Wolf
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.