An investigation of disagreement in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions

Pharmaceutical Medicine

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 17-24

  Davies, Emma C ^a,b   Rowe, Philip H ^b   James, Sally ^a   Nickless, Gareth ^b,c   Ganguli, Amitava ^a,d   Danjuma, Mohammed ^a,d   Owens, Lynn ^a,d   Odgers, Elizabeth ^a   Green, Christopher F ^e   Mottram, David R ^b   Pirmohamed, Munir ^d  

^a ROYAL LIVERPOOL AND BROADGREEN UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c ARROWE PARK HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^e Countess of Chester NHS Foundation Trust ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Adverse drug reactions; Adverse reaction monitoring; Pharmacovigilance; Postmarketing surveillance; Statistics.

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HUMAN; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; NARANJO ADR PROBABILITY SCALE; NURSE; PHARMACIST; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 79751488239     PISSN: 11782595     EISSN: 11791993     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11539800-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Venulet J. Role and place of causality assessment. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1992; 1: 225-34
2. Lane DA. The Bayesian approach to causality assessment: an introduction. Drug Inf J 1986; 20: 455-61 (Pubitemid 17004495)
3. Busto U, Naranjo CA, Sellers EM. Comparison of two recently published algorithms for assessing the probability of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1982; 13: 223-7 (Pubitemid 13143958)
4. Pere JC, Begaud B, Haramburu F, et al. Computerized assessment of six adverse drug reaction procedures. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1986; 40: 451-61 (Pubitemid 16009048)
5. Michel DJ, Knodel LC. Comparison of three algorithms used to evaluate adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm 1986; 43: 1709-14 (Pubitemid 16059508)
6. Miremont G, Haramburu F, Begaud B, et al. Adverse drug reactions: physicians opinions versus a causality assessment method. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 46: 285-9 (Pubitemid 2087191)
7. Lanctot KL, Naranjo CA. Comparison of the Bayesian approach and a simple drug algorithm for assessment ofadverse drug events. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995; 58: 692-8 (Pubitemid 26018854)
8. Frick PA, Cohen LG, Rovers JP. Algorithms used in adverse drug event reports: a comparative study. Ann Pharmacother 1997; 31: 164-7 (Pubitemid 27074101)
9. Macedo AF, Marques FB, Ribero CF, et al. Causality assessment ofadverse drug reactions: comparison of the results obtained from published decisional algorithms and algorithms and from the evaluations of an expert panel, ac-cording to different levels ofimputability. J Clin Pharm Ther 2003; 28:137-43 (Pubitemid 36566913)
10. Arimone Y, Begaud B, Miremont-Salame G, et al. Agreement of expert judgement in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol2005; 61: 169-73
11. Aronson J, Hauben M. Anecdotes thatprovidedefinitive evidence. BMJ 2006; 333 (7581): 1267-9
12. Davies EC, Green CF, Taylor S, et al. Adverse drug reactions in hospital inpatients: a prospective analysis of 3695 patient-episodes. PLo S ONE 2009; 4 (2): E4439
13. Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM, et al. A method for estimating the probability ofadverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 30: 239-45 (Pubitemid 12149145)
14. Flack VF, Afifi AA, Lachenbruch PA. Sample size determination for the twoassessor kappa statistic. Psychometrika 1988; 53: 321-5
15. Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 2005; 85: 257-68 (Pubitemid 40333545)
16. Kelly WN, Arellano FM, Barnes J, et al. Guidelines for submitting adverse event reports for publication. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf2007; 16: 581-7 (Pubitemid 46824280)
17. Snarr BS, Phan SV, Garner A, et al. Symptomatic bradycardia with oral aripiprazole and oral ziprasidone. Ann Pharmacother 2010; 44: 760-3
18. Campione E, Diluvio L, Paterno EJ, et al. Kaposi's sarcoma in a patient treated with imatinib mesylate for chronic myeloid leukemia. Clin Ther 2009 Nov; 31 (11): 2565-9
19. European Medicines Agency. ICH Topic E 2 A. Clinical safety data management: definitions and standards for expedited reporting. CPMP/ICH/377/9 1995 Jun [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en- GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500002749.pdf [Accessed 2011 Jan 9]
20. Pirmohamed M, James S, Meakin S, et al. Adverse drug reactions as a cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients. BMJ 2004; 329: 15-9 (Pubitemid 38869995)
21. Onder G, Penninx BW, Landi F, et al. Depression and adverse drug reactions among hospitalized older adults. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 301-522
22. Mehta U, Durrheim DN, Blockman M, et al. Adverse drug reactions in adult medical inpatients in a South African hospital serving a community with a high HIV/AIDS prevalence: prospective observational study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 65: 396-406 (Pubitemid 351320492)
23. Begaud B, Evreux JC, Jouglard J, et al. Unexpected or toxic drug reaction assessment (imputation): actualization of the method used in France [in French]. Therapie 1985; 40: 115-8 (Pubitemid 15033379)
24. Venulet J, Ciucci AG, Berneker GC. Updating of a method for causality assessment ofadverse drug reactions. Int J Clin Pharm Ther Toxicol 1986; 24: 559-69
25. WHO Collaborating Centre for Adverse Drug Reactions. The use of the WHO-MC system for standardised case causality assessment [online]. Available from URL: http://www.who-umc.org/graphics/4409.pdf [Accessed 2009 Nov 11]
26. Davies EC, Green CF, Mottram DR, et al. Emergency re-admissions to hospital due to adverse drug reactions within 1 year of the index admission. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70 (5): 749-55
27. Bauer TM, Bircher AJ. Drug-induced hepatocellular liver injury due to benzylpenicillin with evidence oflymphocyte sensitization. J Hepatol 1991; 26: 429432
28. Kramer MS, Feinstein AR. Clinical biostatistics LIV: the biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 29: 111-23
29. Kraemer HC, Periyakoil VS, Noda A. Tutorial in biostatistics: kappa coefficients in medical research. Stat Med 2002; 21: 2109-29 (Pubitemid 34752626)
30. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement ofobserver agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74 (Pubitemid 8054849)
31. Agbabiaki TB, Savovic J, Ernst E. Methodsforcausalityassessmentofadverse drug reactions. Drug Saf2008; 31 (1): 21-37
32. Meyboom RH, Hekster YA, Egberts AC, et al. Causal or casual? The role of causality assessment in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997 Dec; 17 (6): 374-89 (Pubitemid 28017927)
33. Davies EC Adverse drug reactions in hospital inpatients. [PhD thesis]. Liverpool. Liverpool John Moores University, 2008
34. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa. I: the problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990; 43: 543-9 (Pubitemid 20178543)
35. Cicchetti DV, Feinstein AR. High agreement but low kappa. II: resolving the paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990; 43: 551-8 (Pubitemid 20178544)
36. Lantz CA, Nebenzahl E. Behavior and interpretation of the k statistic: resolution of the two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 431-4 (Pubitemid 26149667)
37. Louik C, Lacoutre PG, Mitchell AA, et al. A study of adverse reaction algorithms in a drug surveillance program. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1985; 38: 183-7 (Pubitemid 16248170)
38. Lane DA, Kramer MS, Hutchinson TA, et al. The causality assessment of adverse drug reactions using a Bayesian approach. Pharmaceut Med 1987; 2: 265-83 (Pubitemid 18004758)
39. Maria MAJ, Victorino RMM. Development and validation of a clinical scale for the diagnosis ofdrug-induced hepatitis. Hepatology 1997; 26: 664-9 (Pubitemid 27392358)
40. Benichou C, Solal Celigny P. Standardization of definitions and criteria for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions. Drug-induced blood cyto-penias: report of an international consensus meeting. Nouv Rev Fr Hematol 1991; 33 (3): 257-62