155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6463953)
1. [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]
2. [Drug monitoring].
Royer RJ
Bull Soc Ophtalmol Fr; 1985 Nov; Spec No():11-30. PubMed ID: 4064240
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. [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]
4. [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]
5. Historical development of pediatric pharmacology.
Seyberth HW; Rane A; Schwab M
Handb Exp Pharmacol; 2011; 205():v-vi. PubMed ID: 22046631
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Evaluation of the therapeutic value of drugs--a task of clinical pharmacology].
Herken H; Abshagen U
Gynakologe; 1988 Mar; 21(1):14-20. PubMed ID: 3371753
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A model for the future conduct of pharmacovigilance.
Waller PC; Evans SJ
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2003; 12(1):17-29. PubMed ID: 12616844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. [Imputation of the unexpected or toxic effects of drugs. Actualization of the method used in France].
Bégaud B; Evreux JC; Jouglard J; Lagier G
Therapie; 1985; 40(2):111-8. PubMed ID: 4002188
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Adverse drug reactions.
Turner P
Hum Toxicol; 1986 May; 5(3):161-2. PubMed ID: 3710492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. [Postmarketing surveillance of adverse reactions of drugs].
Polli EE; Cortellaro M
Ann Ital Med Int; 1989; 4(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 2702012
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. [Pharmaco-morbidity linking: a potential instrument for post-marketing surveillance].
Stricker BH; Herings RM; Bakker A; Valkenburg HA; Sturmans F
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1990 Sep; 134(39):1886-9. PubMed ID: 2215766
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [Necessity and difficulties of quantitative drug monitoring].
Lagier G; Dally S; Vincens M; Castot A
Therapie; 1983; 38(3):319-23. PubMed ID: 6612668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. [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]
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]
