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.
173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29157026)
21. Comparison of online reporting systems and their compatibility check with respective adverse drug reaction reporting forms. Maharshi V; Nagar P Indian J Pharmacol; 2017; 49(5):374-382. PubMed ID: 29515278 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The validity and reliability of a signal impact assessment tool. Rolfes L; Kolfschoten J; van Hunsel F; van Puijenbroek E Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2016 Jul; 25(7):815-9. PubMed ID: 27193557 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Adverse drug reaction reporting in institutions across six Chinese provinces: a cross-sectional study. Zhang X; Niu R; Feng B; Guo J; Liu Y; Liu X Expert Opin Drug Saf; 2019 Jan; 18(1):59-68. PubMed ID: 29883236 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. An Evaluation of Indian Consumers' Reporting of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions with a Designated Reporting Form. Rehan HS; Sah R; Gupta A; Nagar P Curr Drug Saf; 2017; 12(1):51-56. PubMed ID: 27188794 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Causality assessment of adverse drug reaction reports using an expert-defined Bayesian network. Rodrigues PP; Ferreira-Santos D; Silva A; Polónia J; Ribeiro-Vaz I Artif Intell Med; 2018 Sep; 91():12-22. PubMed ID: 30077492 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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. Théophile H; Arimone Y; Miremont-Salamé G; Moore N; Fourrier-Réglat A; Haramburu F; Bégaud B Drug Saf; 2010 Nov; 33(11):1045-54. PubMed ID: 20925441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Assessment of a new instrument for detecting preventable adverse drug reactions. Benkirane R; Soulaymani-Bencheikh R; Khattabi A; Benabdallah G; Alj L; Sefiani H; Hedna K; Ouammi L; Olsson S; Pal SN Drug Saf; 2015 Apr; 38(4):383-93. PubMed ID: 25537235 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Traceability of Biologics in The Netherlands: An Analysis of Information-Recording Systems in Clinical Practice and Spontaneous ADR Reports. Klein K; Scholl JH; Vermeer NS; Broekmans AW; Van Puijenbroek EP; De Bruin ML; Stolk P Drug Saf; 2016 Feb; 39(2):185-92. PubMed ID: 26719190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Are consumers ready to take part in the Pharmacovigilance System?--a Portuguese preliminary study concerning ADR reporting. Matos C; van Hunsel F; Joaquim J Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2015 Jul; 71(7):883-90. PubMed ID: 26004569 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Validation of a Novel Method to Assess the Clinical Quality of Information in Pregnancy-Related Pharmacovigilance Case Reports: A ConcePTION Project. van Rijt-Weetink YRJ; Egberts TCG; van Hunsel FPAM; Lewis DJ; Yates LM; Winterfeld U; van Puijenbroek EP Drug Saf; 2024 Mar; 47(3):261-270. PubMed ID: 38183608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A quantitative approach of using genetic algorithm in designing a probability scoring system of an adverse drug reaction assessment system. Koh Y; Yap CW; Li SC Int J Med Inform; 2008 Jun; 77(6):421-30. PubMed ID: 17921048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Important information regarding reporting of adverse drug reactions: a qualitative study. Rolfes L; Wilkes S; van Hunsel F; van Puijenbroek E; van Grootheest K Int J Pharm Pract; 2014 Jun; 22(3):231-3. PubMed ID: 23937120 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Pharmacovigilance network as an additional tool for the surveillance of antimicrobial resistance. Habarugira JMV; Figueras A Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2021 Aug; 30(8):1123-1131. PubMed ID: 33864401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Determination of good pharmacovigilance reporting practices in Quebec hospital pharmacies using a modified Delphi method. Rault P; Mégrourèche É; Labarre JS; Pettersen-Coulombe F; Lebel D; Bussières JF Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2019 Jul; 28(7):985-992. PubMed ID: 31179606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Quality check of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting forms of different countries. Bandekar MS; Anwikar SR; Kshirsagar NA Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2010 Nov; 19(11):1181-5. PubMed ID: 20845409 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Patient-Reported Safety Information: A Renaissance of Pharmacovigilance? Härmark L; Raine J; Leufkens H; Edwards IR; Moretti U; Sarinic VM; Kant A Drug Saf; 2016 Oct; 39(10):883-90. PubMed ID: 27379887 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Allergy-Like Immediate Reactions with Herbal Medicines: A Retrospective Study Using Data from VigiBase®. Pokladnikova J; Meyboom RH; Meincke R; Niedrig D; Russmann S Drug Saf; 2016 May; 39(5):455-64. PubMed ID: 26936182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]