Cited by 646Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsPharmaceutical industry and healthcarePatient Safety and Medication Errors

The Missing Voice of Patients in Drug-Safety Reporting

Open access
Basch, Ethan·2010·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

A patient wants to know about symptoms she may have from a prescription drug she is taking.Consulting the label's "Adverse Reactions" section, she finds a wealth of data.Little does she realize thatThe New England

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 · 10.1056/nejmp0911494

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many clinical hepatology studies are based on clinician-reported adverse events or improvements, which do not correlate well with patient-reported harms or improvements.

    “Many clinical hepatology studies are based on clinician-reported adverse events or improvements, which do not correlate well with patient-reported harms or improvements [14, 15].”

    From Novel patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used in a pilot and feasibility study of a Cognitive Behavioral Coping Skills (CBCS) group intervention for patients with chronic hepatitis C (2018) · cites this paper as [14]

    In “The Missing Patient Voice in Drug-Safety Reporting” (page not specified), Basch says clinical-trial adverse-symptom data rely largely on clinicians’ impressions and that clinicians downgrade or miss symptoms patients report. This supports the point about discrepancies in reported harms, but the paper does not establish the claim specifically for hepatology studies or address agreement about reported improvements. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [4]Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public National Academies Press Washington, DC 2006

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Basch, E.
Affiliations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Basch, Ethan
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2010-03-11
Volume
362
Issue
10
Pages
865-869
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2050104081
Cited by
646
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 34
FWCI
47.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
National Cancer Institute (K07CA124851)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
drug safety reporting, adverse drug reactions, patient participation, adverse event reporting, prescription drug labeling, patient awareness
MeSH terms
Drug Labeling, Humans, Patient Participation, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems, Government Regulation, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

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