120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3443041)
1. The desire to regulate: the wish to discover.
Lasagna L
Drugs Exp Clin Res; 1987; 13(11):659-64. PubMed ID: 3443041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. [Postmarketing surveillance of drugs].
Simon P; Soubrié C
Rev Prat; 1983 Jan; 33(1-2):23-8. PubMed ID: 6823538
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Biological indicator test packs: a survey of user practices.
Smith DE
J Healthc Mater Manage; 1988; 6(4):38, 40-2. PubMed ID: 10287653
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Round table: Post-marketing evaluation of fertility-regulating drugs as viewed by the pharmaceutical industry.
Hum Reprod; 1987 Apr; 2(3):241-63. PubMed ID: 3597744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Postmarketing surveillance.
Oleen MA
Can J Hosp Pharm; 1987 Oct; 40(5):171-2, 179-80. PubMed ID: 10284449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Adverse drug reaction reporting.
Bosco LA
Am J Gastroenterol; 1987 Apr; 82(4):356-7. PubMed ID: 3565343
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [Industrial drug-surveillance. Spontaneous notification: data collection, survey].
Trunet P
Rev Med Interne; 1986 Nov; Spec No():35-9. PubMed ID: 3809778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. What you should know about FDA-USP Drug Product Problem Reporting Program.
McGinnis DM
Pharm Times; 1986 Apr; 52(4):101-4, 109. PubMed ID: 10276472
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. [Critical study of methods of postmarketing drug surveillance].
Gut JP; Auriche M; Spriet-Pourra C; Juillet Y
Therapie; 1985; 40(5):313-9. PubMed ID: 3913048
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Postmarketing studies of drug efficacy.
Strom BL; Melmon KL; Miettinen OS
Arch Intern Med; 1985 Oct; 145(10):1791-4. PubMed ID: 3899034
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. [Notification of possible adverse reactions to drugs in medical publications].
Laporte JR; Capellà D
Med Clin (Barc); 1984 Oct; 83(11):474. PubMed ID: 6503426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [How to report side-effects of drugs?].
Guillaume JC
Ann Dermatol Venereol; 1986; 113(4):375-6. PubMed ID: 3767239
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Revised ADR report permits internal review of drug experience.
Jeffrey LP
Pharm Times; 1986 Dec; 52(12):48-50. PubMed ID: 10317827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Challenges in collecting, accessing and evaluating post market surveillance AERS in patients receiving dietary supplements.
Kingston R
Thromb Res; 2005; 117(1-2):137-44; discussion 145-51. PubMed ID: 16139875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Imputability in drug monitoring. Principles of the balanced drug reaction assessment method and principal errors to avoid].
Lagier G; Vincens M; Castot A
Therapie; 1983; 38(3):303-18. PubMed ID: 6612667
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [Bayesian approach to the imputability of undesirable phenomena to drugs].
Auriche M
Therapie; 1985; 40(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 4095686
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Potential role of postmarketing research.
Venulet J
Drugs Exp Clin Res; 1987; 13(11):673-83. PubMed ID: 3443043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Is imputation in drug surveillance reliable?].
Girard M
Therapie; 1984; 39(3):291-6. PubMed ID: 6463954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
