The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Extending the methods used to screen the WHO drug safety database towards analysis of complex associations and improved accuracy for rare events
Abstract
Post-marketing drug safety data sets are often massive, and entail problems with heterogeneity and selection bias. Nevertheless, quantitative methods have proven a very useful aid to help clinical experts in screening for previously unknown associations in these data sets. The WHO international drug safety database is the world's largest data set of its kind with over three million reports on suspected adverse drug reaction incidents. Since 1998, an exploratory data analysis method has been in routine use to screen for quantitative associations in this data set. This method was originally based on large sample approximations and limited to pairwise associations, but in this article we propose more accurate credibility interval estimates and extend the method to allow for the analysis of more complex quantitative associations. The accuracy of the proposed credibility intervals is evaluated through comparison to precise Monte Carlo simulations. In addition, we propose a Mantel-Haenszel-type adjustment to control for suspected confounders.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003) · doi:10.1201/9780429258480 · Cited by 27,276
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689
Cited by
Data-driven prediction of drug effects and interactions
Tatonetti, N. P., Ye, P. P., Daneshjou, R., & Altman, R. B. (2012) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3003377 · Cited by 936
VigiBase, the WHO Global ICSR Database System: Basic Facts
Lindquist, M. (2008) · Drug Information Journal · doi:10.1177/009286150804200501 · Cited by 587
Shrinkage observed-to-expected ratios for robust and transparent large-scale pattern discovery
Norén, G. N., Hopstadius, J., & Bate, A. (2013) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280211403604 · Cited by 336
Self-citationDecision support methods for the detection of adverse events in post-marketing data
Hauben, M., & Bate, A. (2009) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2008.12.012 · Cited by 163
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Norén, G. N., Bate, A., Orre, R., & Edwards, I. R.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 3740-3757
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W1967555951
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Extending the methods used to screen the WHO drug safety database towards analysis of complex associations and improved accuracy for rare events. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sim.2473
- The paper
- Norén, G. N., Bate, A., Orre, R., & Edwards, I. R. (2006). Extending the methods used to screen the WHO drug safety database towards analysis of complex associations and improved accuracy for rare events. Statistics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2473
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.