Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 201

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Under‐reporting of adverse drug reactions in general practice

Open access
Moride, Y., Haramburu, F., Requejo, A. A., Bégaud, B.·1997·British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract

Aims In post‐marketing setting, spontaneous reporting by physicians is a mode of surveillance of adverse effects associated with drug use. The objective of this study was to quantitatively assess under‐reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in general practice. Methods A random sample of 100 general practitioners (GPs) practising in the region of the Bordeaux pharmacovigilance centre were surveyed to obtain data on adverse effects observed. Overall, 81 GPs agreed to record during 3 non‐consecutive working days any effect they believed to be associated with drug use. The types of effects, regardless of their seriousness and labelling, and the drugs suspected were characterized and compared to spontaneous reports received from GPs by the Bordeaux pharmacovigilance centre during the reference period. Results The average number of ADRs observed per day per GP was 1.99. The estimate of the under‐reporting coefficient (U) was 24 433 (95% confidence interval: 20 702–28 837) which indicates that, as a whole, GPs might be expected to report only 1 out of every 24 433 ADRs to the pharmacovigilance centre. Under‐reporting was lowest for serious and unlabelled effects (U=4610; 95%CI: 2514–8454) and for drugs marketed recently (U=12 802; 95% CI: 8174–20 050). Conclusions Adverse effects due to drugs are part of GPs routine activities. According to the observed trend in under‐reporting, there appears to be a selection process which indicates that spontaneous reporting in general practice is not conducive to an exhaustive description of the safety profile of a drug. However, our findings are consistent with greater efficacy of spontaneous reporting in detecting serious and unlabelled effect.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2125.1997.05417.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 201

Metadata

Authors
Moride, Y., Haramburu, F., Requejo, A. A., & Bégaud, B.
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-02
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
177-181
ISSN
  • 0306-5251 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2125
OpenAlex
W2115461720
Cited by
201
References
0
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Under‐reporting of adverse drug reactions in general practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2125.1997.05417.x
The paper
Moride, Y., Haramburu, F., Requejo, A. A., & Bégaud, B. (1997). Under‐reporting of adverse drug reactions in general practice. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2125.1997.05417.x

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.