Comparing the toxicity of two drugs in the framework of spontaneous reporting: A confidence interval approach

Pascale Tubert-Bitter, Bernard Begaud, Yola Moride, Anicet Chaslerie, Françoise Haramburu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations

Abstract

Spontaneous reporting remains the most frequently used technique in post-marketing surveillance. Decision making usually depends on comparisons between the number of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported for two drugs on the basis of an equivalent number of prescriptions. The validity of such comparisons is expected to be jeopardized by probable underreporting of ADR cases. This problem is accentuated when it cannot be assumed that the magnitude of underreporting is the same for the both drugs. Differences in reporting ratios can overemphasize, cancel, or reverse the conclusions of a statistical comparison based on the number of reports. We propose a single method for (1) calculating confidence intervals for relative risks estimated in the context of spontaneous reporting and (2) deriving the range of reporting ratios for which the conclusion of the statistical comparison remains statistically valid.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)121-123
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of clinical epidemiology
Volume49
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1996
Externally publishedYes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Epidemiology

Keywords

  • Confidence intervals
  • Pharmacoepidemiology
  • Pharmacovigilance
  • Poisson distribution
  • Spontaneous reporting

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing the toxicity of two drugs in the framework of spontaneous reporting: A confidence interval approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this