Data quality management in pharmacovigilance

Drug Safety

Volumn 27, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 857-870

  Lindquist, Marie ^a  

^a UPPSALA MONITORING CENTRE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; COMPUTER SYSTEM; COOPERATION; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DRUG INFORMATION; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; INFORMATION CENTER; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; DATA COLLECTION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; DRUG THERAPY; HUMANS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; SWEDEN;

EID: 4944230739     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200427120-00003     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Strom BL. What is pharmacoepidemiology? In: Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2000: 3-15
2. WHO. The importance of pharmacovigilance: safety monitoring of medicinal products. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002
3. Lindquist M. Seeing and observing in pharmacovigilance: achievements and prospects in worldwide drug safety [doctoral thesis]. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen, 2003
4. Edwards IR. Adverse drug reactions. In: van Boxtel CJ, Santoso B, Edwards IR, editors. Drug benefits and risks: International text book of clinical pharmacology. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2001: 195-209
5. Mecella M, Scannapieco M, Virgillito A, et al. Managing data quality in cooperative information systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS 2002); USA: Springer-Verlag, 2002; 486-502
6. Redman TC. Data quality for the information age. Norwood: Artech House Inc, 1996
7. Uehling MD. Is data quality really job 1? [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bio-itworld.com/news/021003_report1988.html [Accessed 2003 Sep 25]
8. Wand Y, Wang RY. Anchoring data quality dimensions in ontological foundations. Commun ACM 1996; 39 (11): 86-95
9. Strong DM, Lee YW, Wang RY. Data quality in context. Commun ACM 1997; 40 (5): 103-10
10. Tull PG. Managing data quality within BT: a feasibility study [master's thesis]. Leicester: Leicester University, 1997
11. Peachey J. From pharmacovigilance to pharmacoperformance. Drug Saf 2002; 25 (6): 399-405
12. Lindquist M. The WHO programme for international drug monitoring: the present and future. In: Mitchard M, editor. Electronic communication technologies. Bufffalo (NY); Interpharm Press Inc., 1998: 527-49
13. Bortnichak EA, Wise RP, Salive ME, et al. Proactive safety surveillance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 10 (3): 191-6
14. Golden MS. An incident reporting system: documented at the point of service. J Healthc Risk Manag 1998; 18 (2): 18-26
15. Lumpkin MM. International pharmacovigilance: developing cooperation to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Pharmacol Toxicol 2000; 86 Suppl. 1: 20-2
16. Stergachis AS. Record linkage studies for postmarketing drug surveillance: data quality and validity considerations. Drug Intell Clin Pharm 1988; 22 (2): 157-61
17. Spindler P, Seiler JP. Quality management of pharmacology and safety pharmacology studies. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2002; 16 (2): 83-90
18. Edwards IR. Spontaneous ADR reporting and drug safety signal induction in perspective: to honour Professor Jens Schou. Pharmacol Toxicol 2000; 86 Suppl. 1: 16-9
19. Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2000
20. Mann R, Andrews E, editors. Pharmacovigilance. 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2002
21. Girard M. Data quality in post-marketing surveillance. Adverse Drug React Acute Poisoning Rev 1986; 5 (2): 87-95
22. O'Neill RT. Biostatistical considerations in pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology: linking quantitative risk assessment in pre-market licensure application safety data, post-market alert reports and formal epidemiological studies. Stat Med 1998; 17 (15-16): 1851-8
23. Edwards IR, Wiholm B-E, Martinez C. Concepts in risk-benefit assessment. Drug Saf 1996; 15 (1): 1-7
24. Meyboom RHB, Egberts ACG, Edwards IR, et al. Principles of signal detection in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 16 (6): 3355-65
25. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9000. Quality management systems: fundamentals and vocabulary. 2nd ed. Geneva: ISO, 2000
26. Redman TC. Why care about data quality? In: Data quality for the information age. Norwood: Artech House Inc., 1996: 3-16
27. English LP. Help for data quality problems (ensuring data quality in data warehouses). Information Week 1996 Oct 7; (600): 53
28. CIOMS. Harmonization of data fields for electronic transmission of case-report information internationally. Public report. Geneva: CIOMS, 1995
29. Management of the ICH guideline on clinical safety data management: data elements for transmission of individual case safety reports [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ich.org/pdfICH/e2bm.pdf [Accessed 2003 Sep 20]
30. WHO drug dictionary 2nd quarter 2003. Uppsala: The Uppsala Monitoring Centre, 2003
31. WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology Dec 2002. Uppsala: The Uppsala Monitoring Centre, 2002
32. Brown EG, Wood L, Wood S. The medical dictionary for regulatory activities (MedDRA). Drug Saf 1999; 20 (2): 109-17
33. WHO. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems, 1989 revision. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1992
34. van der Klauw MM, Stricker BH, Herings RM, et al. A population based case-cohort study of drug-induced anaphylaxis. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 35 (4): 400-8
35. Rawlins MD. Pharmacovigilance: paradise lost, regained or postponed? The William Withering Lecture 1994. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1995; 29 (1): 41-9
36. Belton KJ. Attitude survey of adverse drug-reaction reporting by health care professionals across the European Union. The European Pharmacovigilance Research Group. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 52 (6): 423-7
37. Begaud B, Martin K, Haramburu F, et al. Rates of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in France [letter]. JAMA 2002; 288 (13): 1588
38. Wack JP, Carnahan LJ. Keeping your site comfortably secure: an introduction to Internet firewalls. NIST Special Publication 800-10 [online]. Available from URL: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-10/main.html [Accessed 2003 Sep 20]
39. van Puijenbroek EP, Bate A, Leufkens HG, et al. A comparison of measures of disproportionality for signal detection in spontaneous reporting systems for adverse drug reactions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2002; 11 (1): 3-10
40. Bate A, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, et al. A Bayesian neural network method for adverse drug reaction signal generation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 54: 315-21
41. DuMouchel W. Bayesian data mining in large frequency tables, with an application to the FDA spontaneous reporting system. Am Stat 1999; 53 (3): 177-90
42. Evans SJ, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 10 (6): 483-6
43. van Puijenbroek EP. Quantitative signal detection in pharmacovigilance [Doctorate]. Utrecht: Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2001
44. Lindquist M, Ståhl M, Bate A, et al. A retrospective evaluation of a data mining approach to aid finding new adverse drug reaction signals in the WHO international database. Drug Saf 2000; 23 (6): 533-42
45. Orre R. On data mining and classification using a Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network [Doctorate]. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2003
46. Brown EG. Methods and pitfalls in searching drug safety databases utilising the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). Drug Saf 2003; 26 (3): 145-58
47. Coulter DM. The New Zealand intensive medicines monitoring programme. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1998; 7: 79-90
48. Scott HD, Thatcher-Renshaw A, Rosenbaum SE, et al. Physician reporting of adverse drug reactions. Results of the Rhode Island adverse drug reaction project. JAMA 1990; 263 (13): 1785-8
49. Orsini MJ, Orsini PA, Thorn DB, et al. An ADR surveillance programme: increasing quality, number of incidence reports. Formulary 1995; 30 (8): 454-61
50. McGettigan P, Golden J, Conroy RM, et al. Reporting of adverse drug reactions by hospital doctors and the response to intervention. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 44 (1): 98-100
51. Concept paper. Risk assessment of observational data: good pharmacovigilance practices and pharmacoepidemiological assessment [online]. Available from URL: http://www.fda.gov/cder/meeting/groupIIIfinal.pdf [Accessed 2003 Sep 20]