These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19388726)

  • 21. Sex differences in adverse drug reactions reported to the National Pharmacovigilance Centre in the Netherlands: An explorative observational study.
    de Vries ST; Denig P; Ekhart C; Burgers JS; Kleefstra N; Mol PGM; van Puijenbroek EP
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2019 Jul; 85(7):1507-1515. PubMed ID: 30941789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Fifteen years of patient reporting -what have we learned and where are we heading to?
    van Hunsel F; Härmark L; Rolfes L
    Expert Opin Drug Saf; 2019 Jun; 18(6):477-484. PubMed ID: 31030578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Harmonisation in pharmacovigilance.
    Edwards IR; Biriell C
    Drug Saf; 1994 Feb; 10(2):93-102. PubMed ID: 8011183
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A survey of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in 10 years of activity in a pharmacovigilance centre in Portugal.
    Marques J; Ribeiro-Vaz I; Pereira AC; Polónia J
    Int J Pharm Pract; 2014 Aug; 22(4):275-82. PubMed ID: 24188533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Filling quality of the reports of adverse drug reactions received at the Pharmacovigilance Centre of São Paulo (Brazil): missing information hinders the analysis of suspected associations.
    Ribeiro A; Lima S; Zampieri ME; Peinado M; Figueras A
    Expert Opin Drug Saf; 2017 Dec; 16(12):1329-1334. PubMed ID: 28817316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK 'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys.
    Avery AJ; Anderson C; Bond CM; Fortnum H; Gifford A; Hannaford PC; Hazell L; Krska J; Lee AJ; McLernon DJ; Murphy E; Shakir S; Watson MC
    Health Technol Assess; 2011 May; 15(20):1-234, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 21545758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Intensive safety monitoring program of antineoplastic medicines: A pilot study in a Portuguese oncology hospital.
    Mendes D; Rigueiro G; Silva RS; Penedones A; Alves C; Sousa G; Batel-Marques F
    J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2020 Jan; 26(1):133-140. PubMed ID: 31117914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Adverse drug reaction reporting and pharmacovigilance of new therapeutic agents.
    Haas SJ
    South Med J; 2006 Apr; 99(4):325-6. PubMed ID: 16634234
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a challenge for pharmacovigilance in India.
    Tandon VR; Mahajan V; Khajuria V; Gillani Z
    Indian J Pharmacol; 2015; 47(1):65-71. PubMed ID: 25821314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Spontaneous Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring in a Tertiary Care Centre.
    Kaur K; Kanwal P; Goyal P; Singh P; Yakhmi S; Jain S; Kaushal S
    Curr Drug Saf; 2020; 15(3):215-221. PubMed ID: 32735525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Adverse Drug Reaction Reports Received Through the Mobile App, VigiBIP
    Montastruc F; Bagheri H; Lacroix I; Damase-Michel C; Chebane L; Rousseau V; Jouanjus E; Lapeyre-Mestre M; Durrieu G; Montastruc JL
    Drug Saf; 2018 May; 41(5):511-514. PubMed ID: 29270770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Identifying signals of interest when screening for drug-outcome associations in health care data.
    Pottegård A; Hallas J; Wang SV; Gagne JJ
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Sep; 84(9):1865-1867. PubMed ID: 29862551
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Direct reporting by patients of adverse drug reactions in Spain].
    Esther Salgueiro M; Jimeno FJ; Aguirre C; García M; Ordóñez L; Manso G
    Farm Hosp; 2013; 37(1):65-71. PubMed ID: 23461502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Pharmacovigilance in India: Present Scenario and Future Challenges.
    Kalaiselvan V; Srivastava S; Singh A; Gupta SK
    Drug Saf; 2019 Mar; 42(3):339-346. PubMed ID: 30269244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The value of patient reporting to the pharmacovigilance system: a systematic review.
    Inácio P; Cavaco A; Airaksinen M
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2017 Feb; 83(2):227-246. PubMed ID: 27558545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Causality assessment in reports on adverse drug reactions. Algorithm of Spanish pharmacovigilance system].
    Aguirre C; García M
    Med Clin (Barc); 2016 Nov; 147(10):461-464. PubMed ID: 27450163
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Language does not come "in boxes": Assessing discrepancies between adverse drug reactions spontaneous reporting and MedDRA® codes in European Portuguese.
    Inácio P; Airaksinen M; Cavaco A
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2015; 11(5):664-74. PubMed ID: 25596069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Overview of Pharmacovigilance System in Vietnam: Lessons Learned in a Resource-Restricted Country.
    Nguyen KD; Nguyen PT; Nguyen HA; Roussin A; Montastruc JL; Bagheri H; Olsson S
    Drug Saf; 2018 Feb; 41(2):151-159. PubMed ID: 28975584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Communication of findings in pharmacovigilance: use of the term "signal" and the need for precision in its use.
    Hauben M; Reich L
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2005 Jul; 61(5-6):479-80. PubMed ID: 15991039
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The potential role of big data in the detection of adverse drug reactions.
    Sultana J; Trifirò G
    Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol; 2020 Mar; 13(3):201-204. PubMed ID: 32176553
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.