Skip to content

Novel Data-Mining Methodologies for Adverse Drug Event Discovery and Analysis

Harpaz, R., DuMouchel, W., Shah, N. H., Madigan, D., Ryan, P., & Friedman, C. (2012). Novel Data-Mining Methodologies for Adverse Drug Event Discovery and Analysis. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 91(6), 1010-1021.

Type
Journal article
Intellectual base
Primary research
Year
2012
Volume
91
Issue
6
Pages
1010-1021
DOI
10.1038/clpt.2012.50
DOI registrant
Wiley
Link
https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2012.50
Cited from
operations_research

Cited by

1 citation across 1 artifact.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

  • Parallel Independent Inspection
    • In drug safety, post-market pharmacovigilance aggregates adverse-event reports from many physicians to surface signals invisible in any single trial.

      This sourcePost-market pharmacovigilance aggregates spontaneous adverse-event reports from many physicians (e.g., FAERS) and applies disproportionality/signal-detection across enormous case volume to surface rare drug effects invisible in any single pre-market trial.

      SupportedVerified against the work's full text

      Harpaz et al. describe post-approval surveillance pooling spontaneous adverse-event reports from clinicians and others and mining them for signals, because trials cannot reveal the full safety profile.

      “Drug safety surveillance has predominantly relied on spontaneous reporting systems (SRS), which are passive systems comprised of reports of suspected ADEs collected from healthcare professionals, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies”

      From the work's full text.

      Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:c0111e3cebb7 · see in the full table