Comparative Study on the Common Signal Detection Methods of Adverse Drug Reaction

Abstract

CLC Number:

R954

REN Jing-tian, WANG Sheng-feng, HOU Yong-fang, DU Xiao-xi, LI Li-ming. Comparative Study on the Common Signal Detection Methods of Adverse Drug Reaction[J]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance, 2011, 8(6): 356-359.

References

[1] Matsushita, Y, Y. Kuroda, S. Niwa, et al. Criteria revision and performance comparison of three methods of signal detection applied to the spontaneous reporting database of a pharmaceutical manufacturer[J]. Drug Saf,2007, 30(8):715-726.
[2] van Puijenbroek, E.P., A. Bate, H.G. Leufkens, et al. A comparison of measures of disproportionality for signal detection in spontaneous reporting systems for adverse drug reactions[J]. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf,2002, 11(1): 3-10.
[3] Kubota, K, D. Koide T. Hirai. Comparison of data mining metho-dologies using Japanese spontaneous reports[J]. Pharmacoep-idemiol Drug Saf,2004,13(6): 387-394.
[4] Stahl, M, M. Lindquist, I.R. Edwards, et al. Introducing triage logic as a new strategy for the detection of signals in the WHO Drug Monitoring Database[J]. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf, 2004,13(6):355-363.
[5] Roux, E, F Thiessard, A. Fourrier, et al. Evaluation of statistical association measures for the automatic signal generation in pharmacovigilance[J]. IEEE Transactions On Information Technology In Biomedicine:A Publication Of The IEEE Engineering In Medicine And Biology Society,2005, 9(4): 518-527.
[6] Almenoff, J , J M Tonning, A L Gould, et al. Perspectives on the use of data mining in pharmacovigilance[J]. Drug Saf,2005,28(11): 981-1007.
[7] Rothman, K J, S Lanes,S T Sacks. The reporting odds ratio and its advantages over the proportional reporting ratio[J]. Pharmacoe-pidemiol Drug Saf, 2004,13(8): 519-523.
[8] van der Heijden P G, E P van Puijenbroek. On the assessment of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting systems: the influence of under-reporting on odds ratios[J]. Stat Med, 2002,21(14): 2027-2044.
[9] Ye, X Z Fu, H Wang, et al. A computerized system for signal detection in spontaneous reporting system of Shanghai China[J]. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf, 2009,18(2):154-158.
[10] FDA. Guidance for Industry: Good Pharmacovigilance Practices and Pharmacoepidemiologic Assessment[EB/OL].2010-01-27[2011-03-01].http://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInforma-tion/Guidances/UCM126834.pdf:
[11] Almenoff, J S, K K La Croix, et al. Comparative performance of two quantitative safety signalling methods: implications for use in a pharmacovigilance department[J]. Drug Saf,2006,29(10):875-887.
[12] Hauben, M, S. Horn,L Reich. Potential use of data-mining algorithms for the detection of 'surprise' adverse drug reactions[J]. Drug Saf,2007,30(2):143-155.
[13] Hochberg, A M, M Hauben, R K Pearson, etal. An evaluation of three signal-detection algorithms using a highly inclusive reference event database[J]. Drug Saf, 2009,32(6):509-525.
[14] Cesana, M, R Cerutti, E Grossi, etal. Bayesian data mining techniques: the evidence provided by signals detected in single-company spontaneous reports databases[J]. Drug Inf J,2007, 41(1):11-21.
[15] 李婵娟, 王素珍, 王陵, 等. 基于模拟数据库的药品不良反应信号检测方法比较[J]. 中国卫生统计,2009,02:124-127.
[16] Li, C, J Xia, J Deng, et al. A comparison of measures of disproportionality for signal detection on adverse drug reaction spontaneous reporting database of Guangdong province in China[J]. Pharmac-oepidemiol Drug Saf, 2008,17(6): 593-600.
[17] van Puijenbroek, E, W Diemont,K van Grootheest. Application of quantitative signal detection in the Dutch spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions[J]. Drug Saf, 2003, 26(5): 293-301.
（因版面有限,部分参考文献省略,如有需要,请联系编辑部）