122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2603505)
1. [Detection of drug side effects at the Heidelberg Medical Clinic].
Jacubeit T; Drisch D
Verh Dtsch Ges Inn Med; 1989; 95():690-3. PubMed ID: 2603505
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Comprehensive detection of severe, potentially life-threatening drug side effects].
Schönhöfer PS; Wessely-Stickel B; Schulte-Sasse H; Werner W
Verh Dtsch Ges Inn Med; 1989; 95():687-90. PubMed ID: 2603504
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. [30 years' spontaneous recording systems of German physicians--results and experiences].
Kimbel KH
Verh Dtsch Ges Inn Med; 1989; 95():683-6. PubMed ID: 2603503
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. [Drug monitoring].
Royer RJ
Bull Soc Ophtalmol Fr; 1985 Nov; Spec No():11-30. PubMed ID: 4064240
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. An adverse drug reaction reporting program.
Wasan SM; Marshall LB
Can J Hosp Pharm; 1989 Dec; 42(6):239-41. PubMed ID: 10318356
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Detection of side effects. 2: Responsibilities of the pharmaceutical industry, drug commissions, the Federal Health Office and international organizations].
Gleiter CH; Bieck PR
Fortschr Med; 1991 Jul; 109(21):429-31. PubMed ID: 1916572
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. [Regulatory guidelines and drug safety].
Flury W
Ther Umsch; 1993 Jan; 50(1):49-51. PubMed ID: 8378867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An underrecognized challenge in evaluating postmarketing drug safety.
Roden DM
Circulation; 2005 Jan; 111(3):246-8. PubMed ID: 15668350
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [Microcomputerized data bank of nephrotoxic drugs at the Paris-Saint Antoine Regional Drug Monitoring Center].
Hamel JD; Biour M; Cheymol G
Therapie; 1986; 41(5):327-9. PubMed ID: 3810519
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [Drug by drug imputation of adverse effects in drug monitoring. Attempted comparison of different methods].
Lagier G; Vincens M; Lefebure B; Frelon JH
Therapie; 1983; 38(3):295-302. PubMed ID: 6612666
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Statewide test of a new postmarketing drug surveillance system.
Fisher S; Bryant SG; Solovitz BL; Kluge RM
Tex Med; 1987 Aug; 83(8):59-62. PubMed ID: 3660262
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. [Advantages of a microcomputer system in researching duplicated reports].
Biour M; Wagniart F; Jablonka J; Hamel JD; Weissenburger J; Cheymol G
Therapie; 1986; 41(5):383-4. PubMed ID: 3810530
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Pharmacovigilance in India: how safe are the new drugs? How sure are we?
Joshi SR; Sapatnekar SM
J Assoc Physicians India; 2008 Dec; 56():933-4. PubMed ID: 19322970
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The diagnosis of adverse medical events associated with drug treatment.
Stephens MD
Adverse Drug React Acute Poisoning Rev; 1987; 6(1):1-35. PubMed ID: 3303863
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. [Is imputation in drug surveillance reliable?].
Girard M
Therapie; 1984; 39(3):291-6. PubMed ID: 6463954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Critical reflection on the collection and evaluation of adverse drug reaction data.
Venulet J
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1985 Apr; 23 Suppl 1():S48-53. PubMed ID: 3842691
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Misclassification in epidemiologic studies of adverse drug reactions using large managerial data bases.
Graham DJ; Smith CR
Am J Prev Med; 1988; 4(2 Suppl):15-24. PubMed ID: 3079350
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Adverse drug reactions.
Turner P
Hum Toxicol; 1986 May; 5(3):161-2. PubMed ID: 3710492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. [Computerized detection of new adverse effects in drug surveillance. A proposal for the periodic use of the French data bank].
Pham E; Ventre JJ; Saddier P; Descotes J; Evreux JC
Therapie; 1988 May; 43(3):235-7. PubMed ID: 3420571
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [Drug surveillance: the concept, the need and methods].
Moreno González A
An R Acad Nac Med (Madr); 1992; 109(1):197-218; discussion 218-20. PubMed ID: 1463138
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
