The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ALDEN, an Algorithm for Assessment of Drug Causality in Stevens–Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: Comparison With Case–Control Analysis
Abstract
Epidermal necrolysis (EN)--either Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) or toxic EN (TEN)--is a severe drug reaction. We constructed and evaluated a specific algorithm, algorithm of drug causality for EN (ALDEN), in order to improve the individual assessment of drug causality in EN. ALDEN causality scores were compared with those from the French pharmacovigilance method in 100 cases and the case-control results of the EuroSCAR study. Scores attributed by ALDEN segregated widely. ALDEN pointed to a "probable" or "very probable" causality in 69/100 cases as compared to 23/100 with the French method (P < 0.001). It scored "very unlikely" causality for 64% of medications vs. none with the French method. Results of ALDEN scores were strongly correlated with those of the EuroSCAR case-control analysis for drugs associated with EN (r = 0.90, P < 0.0001), with probable causality being reported in 218/329 exposures. ALDEN excluded causality in 321 drugs that the case-control analysis had described as "probably not associated" and in 22/233 drugs that had been described as inconclusive exposures. Being more sensitive than a general method, ALDEN, which correlates well with case-control analysis results, can be considered a reference tool in SJS/TEN.
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
A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions
Naranjo, C. A., Busto, U., Sellers, E. M., Sandor, P., Ruiz, I., Roberts, E. A., Janecek, E., Domecq, C., & Greenblatt, D. J. (1981) · Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics · doi:10.1038/clpt.1981.154 · Cited by 11,914
Cited by
Trubiano, J. A., Thursky, K. A., Stewardson, A. J., Urbancic, K., Worth, L. J., Jackson, C., Stevenson, W., Sutherland, M., Slavin, M. A., Grayson, M. L., et al. (2017) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/cix244 · Cited by 137
Current perspectives on severe drug eruption
Zhang, J., Lei, Z., Xu, C., Zhao, J., & Kang, X. (2021) · Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology · doi:10.1007/s12016-021-08859-0 · Cited by 60
(2023) · The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice · doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2023.07.001 · Cited by 25
Huang, Y., Wu, C., Chang, T., Peng, C., Lo, G., Hsu, C., Hu, C., & Huang, Y. (2021) · Liver International · doi:10.1111/liv.14990 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Sassolas, B., Haddad, C., Mockenhaupt, M., Dunant, A., Liss, Y., Bork, K., Haustein, U. F., Vieluf, D., Roujeau, J. C., & Le Louet, H.
- Venue
- Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-04-07
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 60-68
- ISSN
- 0009-9236 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6535
- OpenAlex
- W2134537227
- Cited by
- 758
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.04
- 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
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.