Accuracy of hepatic adverse drug reaction reporting in one English health region

BMJ

Volumn 319, Issue 7224, 1999, Pages 1541-

  Aithal, Guruprasad P ^a   Rawlins, Michael D ^b   Day, Christopher P ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DRUG INDUCED DISEASE; HUMAN; LIVER DISEASE; LIVER FUNCTION TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; CHEMICALLY INDUCED DISORDER; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; GENERAL PRACTICE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; STATISTICS; TIME; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; ENGLAND; FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS; LIVER DISEASES; LIVER FUNCTION TESTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0033547542     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.319.7224.1541     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Maria VAJ, Victorino RMM. Development and validation of a clinical scale for the diagnosis of drug-induced hepatitis. Hepatology 1997; 26: 664–669.
2. Danan G. Consensus meetings on: causality assessment of drug-induced liver injury. J Hepatol 1988; 7: 132–136.
3. Benichou C. Criteria of drug-induced liver disorders. Report of an international consensus meeting. J Hepatol 1990; 11: 272–276.
4. Aithal PG, Day CP. The natural history of histologically proved drug induced liver disease. Gut 1999; 44: 731–735.
5. Rawlins MD. Pharmacovigilance: paradise lost, regained or postponed? J R Coll Physicians Lond 1995; 29: 41–49.