114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3227516)
21. Measuring adverse drug reactions in a postmarketing surveillance system.
Fisher S; Bryant SG; Kluge RM
Psychopharmacol Bull; 1986; 22(1):272-7. PubMed ID: 3726073
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. [When can the cases of toxic or adverse effects of drugs be rejected? 80 cases].
Lagier G; Castot A; Sabouraud S; de Cremoux P; Efthymiou ML
Therapie; 1990; 45(5):435-6. PubMed ID: 2260040
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Rhode Island physicians' recognition and reporting of adverse drug reactions.
Scott HD; Rosenbaum SE; Waters WJ; Colt AM; Andrews LG; Juergens JP; Faich GA
R I Med J (1976); 1987 Jul; 70(7):311-6. PubMed ID: 3476980
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Toward improved adverse event/suspected adverse drug reaction reporting.
Gross R; Strom BL
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2003 Mar; 12(2):89-91. PubMed ID: 12642971
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. [Cost/benefit analysis of a regional drug surveillance center].
Mignot G; Chichmanian RM; Spreux A; Bernard G
Therapie; 1988; 43(5):377-8. PubMed ID: 3147546
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Monitoring adverse drug reactions in the postmarketing phase.
Hoigné R; Hottinger S
Pharm Acta Helv; 1988; 63(1):2-12. PubMed ID: 3283774
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Epidemiologic assessment of adverse drug effects.
Stern RS
Semin Dermatol; 1989 Sep; 8(3):136-40. PubMed ID: 2701270
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. [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]
30. [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]
31. [Methods for studying the adverse effects of drugs. I. Comparison of imputability methods: modelling and methodology].
Péré JC; Begaud B; Haramburu F; Albin H
Therapie; 1984; 39(3):279-89. PubMed ID: 6463953
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Adverse drug reactions: a review of relevant factors.
Ajayi FO; Sun H; Perry J
J Clin Pharmacol; 2000 Oct; 40(10):1093-101. PubMed ID: 11028248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Industrial pharmacovigilance of drugs. Legal statute of responsible physicians].
Demarez JP; Couzinier JP
Acta Med Leg Soc (Liege); 1982; 32():339-45. PubMed ID: 7183148
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Drug-induced cancer.
Prescrire Int; 2010 Feb; 19(105):21. PubMed ID: 20455337
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Adverse drug reactions.
Turner P
Hum Toxicol; 1986 May; 5(3):161-2. PubMed ID: 3710492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. [Drug surveillance and adverse reactions to drugs. The literature and importance of historical data].
Mariani L; Minora T; Ventresca GP
Clin Ter; 1996 Dec; 147(12):653-72. PubMed ID: 9296925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Use of an algorithm to evaluate published reports of adverse drug reactions.
Case B; Oszko MA
Am J Hosp Pharm; 1991 Jan; 48(1):121-2. PubMed ID: 2000870
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. [Cutaneous side-effects in drug assessment].
Jean-Pastor MJ
Therapie; 2002; 57(3):265-8. PubMed ID: 12422540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Notifying patients of adverse drug reactions.
Pane FJ; Ringer L; Ferguson L; Koshko N
Am J Hosp Pharm; 1991 Feb; 48(2):236-7. PubMed ID: 2003491
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
