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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33184850)

  • 1. The value of case reports and spontaneous reporting systems for pharmacovigilance and clinical practice.
    Raschi E; La Placa M; Poluzzi E; De Ponti F
    Br J Dermatol; 2021 Mar; 184(3):581-583. PubMed ID: 33184850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Adverse drug reactions in neonates: could we be documenting more?
    Hawcutt DB; O'Connor O; Turner MA
    Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol; 2014 Nov; 7(6):807-20. PubMed ID: 25225053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Adverse drug reaction reporting: how can drug consumption information add to analyses using spontaneous reports?
    Svendsen K; Halvorsen KH; Vorren S; Samdal H; Garcia B
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Apr; 74(4):497-504. PubMed ID: 29255992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Current trends in pharmacovigilance: value and gaps of patient reporting.
    Inácio P; Cavaco A; Airaksinen M
    Int J Clin Pharm; 2018 Aug; 40(4):754-757. PubMed ID: 30006734
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [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]  

  • 10. Pharmacovigilance workflow in Europe and Italy and pharmacovigilance terminology.
    Baldo P; Francescon S; Fornasier G
    Int J Clin Pharm; 2018 Aug; 40(4):748-753. PubMed ID: 30094557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Targeted therapies and adverse drug reactions in oncology: the role of clinical pharmacist in pharmacovigilance.
    Fornasier G; Taborelli M; Francescon S; Polesel J; Aliberti M; De Paoli P; Baldo P
    Int J Clin Pharm; 2018 Aug; 40(4):795-802. PubMed ID: 29785683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Systematic review of paediatric studies of adverse drug reactions from pharmacovigilance databases.
    Cliff-Eribo KO; Sammons H; Choonara I
    Expert Opin Drug Saf; 2016 Oct; 15(10):1321-8. PubMed ID: 27501085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The quality of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports from the pharmacovigilance centre in western China.
    Niu R; Xiang Y; Wu T; Zhang Z; Chen Y; Feng B
    Expert Opin Drug Saf; 2019 Jan; 18(1):51-58. PubMed ID: 30574811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Canada's Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting System: A Failing Grade.
    Rawson NS
    J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol; 2015; 22(2):e167-72. PubMed ID: 26590356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of age, sex and seriousness on reporting of adverse drug reactions in Sweden.
    Holm L; Ekman E; Jorsäter Blomgren K
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2017 Mar; 26(3):335-343. PubMed ID: 28071845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Measuring the impact of pharmacovigilance activities, challenging but important.
    van Hunsel F; Gardarsdottir H; de Boer A; Kant A
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2019 Oct; 85(10):2235-2237. PubMed ID: 31368147
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The impact of a changed legislation on reporting of adverse drug reactions in Sweden, with focus on nurses' reporting.
    Karlsson SA; Jacobsson I; Boman MD; Hakkarainen KM; Lövborg H; Hägg S; Jönsson AK
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2015 May; 71(5):631-6. PubMed ID: 25845655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.