Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions: A retrospective analysis of the danish adverse drug reaction database from 2004 to 2006

Drug Safety

Volumn 32, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 1067-1074

  Aagaard, Lise ^a,b,c,d   Nielsen, Lars Hougaard ^a   Hansen, Ebba Holme ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b DANISH MEDICINES AGENCY   (Denmark)

^c FKL Research Centre for Quality in Medicine Use   (Denmark)

^d NONE   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; GABAPENTIN; IMMUNOMODULATING AGENT; MOMETASONE FUROATE; NICOTINE; PREGABALIN; ROFECOXIB; TROPICAMIDE;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; ARTICLE; BLOOD DISEASE; BREAST DISEASE; CONSUMER ADVOCACY; CONVULSION; DATA BASE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; DYSGRAPHIA; DYSPHASIA; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; LYMPHATIC SYSTEM DISEASE; MENTAL DISEASE; MYASTHENIA GRAVIS; NERVE COMPRESSION; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; PHARMACIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STROKE;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DENMARK; HUMANS; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 70349970392     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: 11791942     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11316680-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Stricker B, Psaty BM. Detection, verification and quantifi-cation of ADRs. BMJ 2004; 329: 44-47
2. Lenz W. Malformations caused by drugs in pregnancy. Am J Dis Child 1966; 112: 99-106
3. Geiling EMK, Cannon PR. Pathogenic effects of elixir of sulfanilimide (diethylene glycol) poisoning. JAMA 1938; 111: 919-926
4. Dukes G. The law and ethics of the pharmaceutical industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006
5. van Grootheest K, de Graaf L, de Jong-van den Berg LT. Consumer adverse drug reaction reporting: a new step in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 2003; 26: 211-217
6. Aagaard L, Soendergaard B, Andersen E, et al. Creating knowledge about adverse drug reactions: a critical analysis of the Danish reporting system from 1968 to 2005. Soc Sci Med 2007; 65: 1296-1309
7. Blenkinsopp A, Wilkie P, Wang M, et al. Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 63: 148-156
8. van Grootheest AC, Passier JL, van Puijenbroek EP. Direct reporting of side effects by the patient: favourable experience in the first year [in Dutch]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2005; 149: 529-533
9. Consumer reports on medicines: policy and practice. Int J Risk Saf Med 2000; 13: 117-127
10. Herxheimer A, Mintzes B. Antidepressants and adverse effects in young patients: uncovering the evidence. CMAJ 2004; 170: 487-489
11. de Langen J, van Hunsel F, Passier A, et al. Adverse drug reactions reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience. Drug Saf 2008; 31: 515-524
12. Aagaard L, Stenver DI, Hansen EH. Structures and pro-cesses in spontaneous ADR reporting systems: a comparative study of Australia and Denmark. Pharm World Sci 2008; 30: 563-570
13. MedDRA [online]. Available from URL http://www. meddramsso.com [Accessed 2008 Aug 24]
14. WHO Collaboration Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology [online]. Available from URL http://www.whocc.no/atc [Accessed 2007 Apr 1].
15. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley &. Sons Inc., 2002
16. Medawar C, Herxheimer A. A comparison of adverse drug reaction reports from professionals and users, relating to risk of dependence and suicidal behaviour with paroxetine. Int J Risk Saf Med 2003; 16: 5-19
17. Medawar C, Herxheimer A, Bell A, et al. Paroxetine, pa-norama and user reporting of ADRs: consumer intelligence matters in clinical practice and post-marketing drug surveillance. Int J Risk Saf Med 2002; 15: 161-169
18. van Grootheest AC, de Jong-van den Berg L. Review: pa-tients? role in reporting adverse drug reactions. Exp Opin Drug Saf 2004; 3: 363-368
19. Egberts TC, Smulders M, de Koning FH, et al. Can adverse drug reactions be detected earlier? A comparison of reports by patients and professionals? BMJ 1996; 313: 530-531
20. Mitchell AS, Henry DA, Sanson-Fischer R, et al. Patient as direct source for information on adverse drug reactions. BMJ 1988; 297: 891-893
21. Hughes J, Gill A, Leach HJ, et al. A prospective study of the adverse effects of midazolam on withdrawal in critically ill children. Acta Paediatr 1994; 83 (11): 1194-1199
22. Bongard V, Menard-Tache S, Bagheri H, et al. Perception of the risk of adverse drug reactions: differences between other reporters and non other reporters. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 54: 433-436