| 000 -LEADER |
|---|
| fixed length control field |
a |
| 003 - CONTROL NUMBER IDENTIFIER |
|---|
| control field |
OSt |
| 005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION |
|---|
| control field |
20220209123900.0 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION |
|---|
| fixed length control field |
220209b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d |
| 040 ## - CATALOGING SOURCE |
|---|
| Original cataloging agency |
AIKTC-KRRC |
| Transcribing agency |
AIKTC-KRRC |
| 100 ## - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME |
|---|
| 9 (RLIN) |
15984 |
| Author |
Messaline, Sunitha |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT |
|---|
| Title |
Study of agreement between who-uppsala monitoring c entre criteria, naranjo algorithm, and liverpool algorithm for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions |
| 250 ## - EDITION STATEMENT |
|---|
| Volume, Issue number |
Vol.13(1) |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. |
|---|
| Place of publication, distribution, etc. |
M P |
| Name of publisher, distributor, etc. |
Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd |
| Year |
2021 |
| 300 ## - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION |
|---|
| Pagination |
20-22p. |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. |
|---|
| Summary, etc. |
Objective: A standard causality assessment tool of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) is essential to compute the risk-benefit assessment of the medication taken by the patient and categorize its relationship likelihood. It should be reproducible and should not differ with the background and experience of the evaluator. Though there are a large number of causality assessment tools, none is unanimously accepted worldwide. So, this study was done to assess the agreement between three frequently used methods of causality assessment, the World Health Organisation-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) system, the Naranjo’s algorithm, and the Liverpool algorithm.Methods: 172 ADR forms from the pharmacovigilance unit were randomly selected for the study. Causality assessment was done using three different methods, the WHO-UMC system, Naranjo’s algorithm, and the Liver pool algorithm. Cohen’s Kappa statistics was applied to look for agreement between the causality assessment methods.Results: The agreement between the WHO-UMC criteria and Naranjo’s algorithm was the highest (136), with a Kappa value of 0.511, suggesting a moderate level of agreement. A maximum number of disagreements were noted between the WHO-UMC system and the Liverpool algorithm method (110).Conclusion: A moderate agreement exists between the WHO-UMC system and the Naranjo algorithm. There is poor agreement between the Liverpool algorithm and the other two scales. Therefore, it is recommended that both the WHO-UMC system and the Naranjo algorithm be used for causality assessment of ADRs. |
| 650 #0 - SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM |
|---|
| 9 (RLIN) |
4639 |
| Topical term or geographic name entry element |
PHARMACEUTICS |
| 700 ## - ADDED ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME |
|---|
| 9 (RLIN) |
15985 |
| Co-Author |
Parvathy, Shobha |
| 773 0# - HOST ITEM ENTRY |
|---|
| Place, publisher, and date of publication |
Bhopal Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd |
| International Standard Serial Number |
2656-0097 |
| Title |
International journal of pharmacy and pharmaceutical science |
| 856 ## - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS |
|---|
| URL |
https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ijpps/article/view/39800/24081 |
| Link text |
Click here |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) |
|---|
| Source of classification or shelving scheme |
|
| Koha item type |
Articles Abstract Database |
