203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6612667)
1. [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]
2. [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]
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. [Drug monitoring].
Royer RJ
Bull Soc Ophtalmol Fr; 1985 Nov; Spec No():11-30. PubMed ID: 4064240
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. [Is imputation in drug surveillance reliable?].
Girard M
Therapie; 1984; 39(3):291-6. PubMed ID: 6463954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Adverse drug reactions.
Turner P
Hum Toxicol; 1986 May; 5(3):161-2. PubMed ID: 3710492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. [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]
12. [Sensitivity and specificity of imputability criteria. Study and comparison of these efficacity indices for 7 methods].
Péré JC; Godin MH; Bégaud B; Haramburu F; Albin H
Therapie; 1985; 40(5):307-12. PubMed ID: 4095687
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Potential role of postmarketing research.
Venulet J
Drugs Exp Clin Res; 1987; 13(11):673-83. PubMed ID: 3443043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. [Drug surveillance. Which methods? For which adverse effects? Application to teratogen monitoring].
Goujard J
Therapie; 1985; 40(5):287-92. PubMed ID: 4095683
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. FDA attempting to overcome major roadblocks in monitoring drug safety.
Zielinski SL
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 Jun; 97(12):872-3. PubMed ID: 15956645
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
