-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Urinary incontinence has been shown to affect up to 50% of women. Studies in the USA have shown that up to 80% of these women have an element of stress urinary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Urinary incontinence has been shown to affect up to 50% of women. Studies in the USA have shown that up to 80% of these women have an element of stress urinary incontinence. This imposes significant health and economic burden on society and the women affected. Colposuspension and now mid-urethral slings have been shown to be effective in treating patients with stress incontinence. However, associated adverse events include bladder and bowel injury, groin pain and haematoma formation. This has led to the development of third-generation single-incision slings, also referred to as mini-slings.It should be noted that TVT-Secur (Gynecare, Bridgewater, NJ, USA) is one type of single-incision sling; it has been withdrawn from the market because of poor results. However, it is one of the most widely studied single-incision slings and was used in several of the trials included in this review. Despite its withdrawal from clinical use, it was decided that data pertaining to this sling should be included in the first iteration of this review, so that level 1a data are available in the literature to confirm its lack of efficacy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of mini-sling procedures in women with urodynamic clinical stress or mixed urinary incontinence in terms of improved continence status, quality of life or adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched: Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (includes: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process) (searched 6 February 2013); ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP (searched 20 September 2012); reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with urodynamic stress incontinence, symptoms of stress incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, in which at least one trial arm involves one of the new single-incision slings. The definition of a single-incision sling is "a sling that does not involve either a retropubic or transobturator passage of the tape or trocar and involves only a single vaginal incision (i.e. no exit wounds in the groin or lower abdomen)."
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials and independently extracted data from individual trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 31 trials involving 3290 women. Some methodological flaws were observed in some trials; a summary of these is given in the 'Risk of bias in included studies' section.No studies compared single-incision slings versus no treatment, conservative treatment, colposuspension, laparoscopic procedures or traditional sub-urethral slings. No data on the comparison of single-incision slings versus retropubic mid-urethral slings (top-down approach) were available, but the review authors believe this did not affect the overall comparison versus retropubic mid-urethral slings.Types of single-incision slings included in this review: TVT-Secur (Gynecare); MiniArc (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, USA); Ajust (CR Bard Inc., Covington, USA); Needleless (Mayumana Healthcare, Lisse, The Netherlands); Ophira (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina); Tissue Fixation System (TFS PTY Ltd, Sydney, Australia) and CureMesh (DMed Co. Inc., Seoul, Korea).Women were more likely to remain incontinent after surgery with single-incision slings than with retropubic slings such as tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) (121/292, 41% vs 72/281, 26%; risk ratio (RR) 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 4.14). Duration of the operation was slightly shorter for single-incision slings but with higher risk of de novo urgency (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.25 to 4.56). Four of five studies in the comparison included TVT-Secur as the single-incision sling.Single-incision slings resulted in higher incontinence rates compared with inside-out transobturator slings (30% vs 11%; RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.36). The adverse event profile was significantly worse, specifically consisting of higher risks of vaginal mesh exposure (RR 3.75, 95% CI 1.42 to 9.86), bladder/urethral erosion (RR 17.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 298.88) and operative blood loss (mean difference 18.79, 95% CI 3.70 to 33.88). Postoperative pain was less common with single-incision slings (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.43), and rates of long-term pain or discomfort were marginally lower, but the clinical significance of these differences is questionable. Most of these findings were derived from the trials involving TVT-Secur: Excluding the other trials showed that high risk of incontinence was principally associated with use of this device (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.98 to 3.54). It has been withdrawn from clinical use.Evidence was insufficient to reveal a difference in incontinence rates with other single-incision slings compared with inside-out or outside-in transobturator slings. Duration of the operation was marginally shorter for single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings, but only by approximately two minutes and with significant heterogeneity in the comparison. Risks of postoperative and long-term groin/thigh pain were slightly lower with single-incision slings, but overall evidence was insufficient to suggest a significant difference in the adverse event profile for single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings. Evidence was also insufficient to permit a meaningful sensitivity analysis of the other single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings, as all confidence intervals were wide. The only significant differences were observed in rates of postoperative and long-term pain, and in duration of the operation, which marginally favoured single-incision slings.Overall results show that TVT-Secur is considerably inferior to retropubic and inside-out transobturator slings, but additional evidence is required to allow any reasonable comparison of other single-incision slings versus transobturator slings.When one single-incision sling was compared with another, evidence was insufficient to suggest a significant difference between any of the slings in any of the comparisons made.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
TVT-Secur is inferior to standard mid-urethral slings for the treatment of women with stress incontinence and has already been withdrawn from clinical use. Not enough evidence has been found on other single-incision slings compared with retropubic or transobturator slings to allow reliable comparisons. A brief economic commentary (BEC) identified two studies which reported no difference in clinical outcomes between single-incision slings and transobturator mid-urethral slings, but single-incision slings may be more cost-effective than transobturator mid-urethral slings based on one-year follow-up. Additional adequately powered and high-quality trials with longer-term follow-up are required. Trials should clearly describe the fixation mechanism of these single-incisions slings: It is apparent that, although clubbed together as a single group, a significant difference in fixation mechanisms may influence outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Prosthesis Failure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Safety-Based Medical Device Withdrawals; Suburethral Slings; Urinary Incontinence; Urologic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 28746980
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008709.pub3 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jul 2020Since silicone breast implants were introduced to the market several decades ago, the safety of breast implants has remained controversial. Recently, several studies...
Since silicone breast implants were introduced to the market several decades ago, the safety of breast implants has remained controversial. Recently, several studies have explored breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and breast implant illness (BII). Several countries have developed national breast implant registries to improve the safety and quality of breast implant surgery. We performed a systematic review of the current status of national breast implant registries and propose a pilot form of an appropriate breast implant registry model for Korea. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the "preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) pro forma". PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify all articles containing information on national breast implant registries. We limited the search to articles written in the English language from 2010 to 2020. Articles were reviewed by two independent authors. A total of 63 articles related to national breast implant registries, registry principles and national breast implant registry annual reports were identified. After reviewing the literature, 25 national breast implant registry-related articles were included in the full-text synthesis. Currently, four countries, The Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, and the UK, have breast implant registries with well-formed sources for big data. Overall, similarities in data points were detected for three categories: implant-related complications, operation details, and device information. However, there were differences for each registry in terms of governance, funding, and capture rate. After reviewing other countries' experiences, tentative datasets for the Korean Breast Implant Registry (K-BIR) were developed. The K-BIR can improve the quality of breast implant surgery in Korea by providing datasets on overall processes and outcome measures with quality indicators and risk adjustment factors. This approach will register characteristics of patients and monitor breast implants, complications, and surgical procedures to improve the outcomes of breast implant surgery in Korea. In addition, it can be used as a track-and-trace system with automated notifications to patients in the event of a product recall or other safety concerns related to a specific type of implant.
Topics: Adult; Australia; Austria; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Equipment and Supplies; Female; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Registries; Treatment Outcome; United States
PubMed: 32718052
DOI: 10.3390/medicina56080370 -
BMC Medicine Nov 2016We identified anti-obesity medications withdrawn since 1950 because of adverse drug reactions after regulatory approval, and examined the evidence used to support such... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
We identified anti-obesity medications withdrawn since 1950 because of adverse drug reactions after regulatory approval, and examined the evidence used to support such withdrawals, investigated the mechanisms of the adverse reactions, and explored the trends over time.
METHODS
We conducted searches in PubMed, the World Health Organization database of drugs, the websites of drug regulatory authorities, and selected full texts, and we hand searched references in retrieved documents. We included anti-obesity medications that were withdrawn between 1950 and December 2015 and assessed the levels of evidence used for making withdrawal decisions using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria.
RESULTS
We identified 25 anti-obesity medications withdrawn between 1964 and 2009; 23 of these were centrally acting, via monoamine neurotransmitters. Case reports were cited as evidence for withdrawal in 80% of instances. Psychiatric disturbances, cardiotoxicity (mainly attributable to re-uptake inhibitors), and drug abuse or dependence (mainly attributable to neurotransmitter releasing agents) together accounted for 83% of withdrawals. Deaths were reportedly associated with seven products (28%). In almost half of the cases, the withdrawals occurred within 2 years of the first report of an adverse reaction.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the drugs that affect monoamine neurotransmitters licensed for the treatment of obesity over the past 65 years have been withdrawn because of adverse reactions. The reasons for withdrawal raise concerns about the wisdom of using pharmacological agents that target monoamine neurotransmitters in managing obesity. Greater transparency in the assessment of harms from anti-obesity medications is therefore warranted.
Topics: Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Obesity; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals
PubMed: 27894343
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-016-0735-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2009Editor's note: The anti-inflammatory drug rofecoxib (Vioxx) was withdrawn from the market at the end of September 2004 after it was shown that long-term use (greater... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Editor's note: The anti-inflammatory drug rofecoxib (Vioxx) was withdrawn from the market at the end of September 2004 after it was shown that long-term use (greater than 18 months) could increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in a study of secondary prevention of adenoma recurrence. Further information is available at www.vioxx.com.Rofecoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor previously licensed for treating acute and chronic pain; it was associated with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events than conventional NSAIDs. An earlier Cochrane review (Barden 2005) showed that rofecoxib is at least as effective as conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for postoperative pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of rofecoxib in single oral doses for moderate and severe postoperative pain.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Oxford Pain Relief Database for studies to June 2009.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials of single dose orally administered rofecoxib in adults with moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into the dichotomous outcome of number of participants with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours, from which relative risk and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) were calculated. Numbers of participants using rescue medication over specified time periods, and time to use of rescue medication, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals was collected.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty new studies and seven from the earlier review met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies were in dental surgery and three in other types of surgery. In total, 2636 participants were treated with rofecoxib 50 mg, 20 with rofecoxib 500 mg, and 1251 with placebo. The NNT for at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours with rofecoxib 50 mg was 2.2 (2.0 to 2.3) in all studies combined, 1.9 (1.8 to 2.0) in dental studies, and 6.8 (4.6 to 13) in other types of surgery. The median time to use of rescue medication was 14 hours for rofecoxib 50 mg and 2 hours for placebo. Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication following rofecoxib 50 mg than with placebo. Adverse events did not differ from placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Rofecoxib 50 mg (two to four times the standard daily dose for chronic pain) is an effective single dose oral analgesic for acute postoperative pain in adults, with a relatively long duration of action.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors; Humans; Lactones; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals; Sulfones
PubMed: 19821329
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004604.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014Chronic anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) prevents ischaemic stroke and systemic embolism in people with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) but dose... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) prevents ischaemic stroke and systemic embolism in people with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) but dose adjustment, coagulation monitoring and bleeding limits its use. Direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) are under investigation as potential alternatives.
OBJECTIVES
To assess (1) the comparative efficacy of long-term anticoagulation using DTIs versus VKAs on vascular deaths and ischaemic events in people with non-valvular AF, and (2) the comparative safety of chronic anticoagulation using DTIs versus VKAs on (a) fatal and non-fatal major bleeding events including haemorrhagic strokes, (b) adverse events other than bleeding and ischaemic events that lead to treatment discontinuation and (c) all-cause mortality in people with non-valvular AF.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (July 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, May 2013), MEDLINE (1950 to July 2013), EMBASE (1980 to October 2013), LILACS (1982 to October 2013) and trials registers (September 2013). We also searched the websites of clinical trials and pharmaceutical companies and handsearched the reference lists of articles and conference proceedings.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DTIs versus VKAs for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in people with non-valvular AF.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All three review authors independently performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. Primary analyses compared all DTIs combined versus warfarin. We performed post hoc analyses excluding ximelagatran because this drug was withdrawn from the market owing to safety concerns.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies involving a total of 27,557 participants with non-valvular AF and one or more risk factors for stroke; 26,601 of them were assigned to standard doses groups and included in the primary analysis. The DTIs: dabigatran 110 mg twice daily and 150 mg twice daily (three studies, 12,355 participants), AZD0837 300 mg once per day (two studies, 233 participants) and ximelagatran 36 mg twice per day (three studies, 3726 participants) were compared with the VKA warfarin (10,287 participants). Overall risk of bias and statistical heterogeneity of the studies included were low.The odds of vascular death and ischaemic events were not significantly different between all DTIs and warfarin (odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.05). Sensitivity analysis by dose of dabigatran on reduction in ischaemic events and vascular mortality indicated that dabigatran 150 mg twice daily was superior to warfarin although the effect estimate was of borderline statistical significance (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99). Sensitivity analyses by other factors did not alter the results. Fatal and non-fatal major bleeding events, including haemorrhagic strokes, were less frequent with the DTIs (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97). Adverse events that led to discontinuation of treatment were significantly more frequent with the DTIs (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.82 to 2.61). All-cause mortality was similar between DTIs and warfarin (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.01).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
DTIs were as efficacious as VKAs for the composite outcome of vascular death and ischaemic events and only the dose of dabigatran 150 mg twice daily was found to be superior to warfarin. DTIs were associated with fewer major haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic strokes. Adverse events that led to discontinuation of treatment occurred more frequently with the DTIs. We detected no difference in death from all causes.
Topics: Amidines; Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Benzylamines; Dabigatran; Drug Administration Schedule; Embolism; Female; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals; Stroke; Vitamin K; Warfarin; beta-Alanine
PubMed: 24677203
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009893.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2012Sepsis is a common problem in preterm and term infants. The incidence of neonatal sepsis has declined, but mortality remains high. Recombinant human activated protein C... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sepsis is a common problem in preterm and term infants. The incidence of neonatal sepsis has declined, but mortality remains high. Recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) possess a broad spectrum of activity modulating coagulation and inflammation. In septic adults it may reduce mortality, but no significant benefit has been reported in children with severe sepsis.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether treatment with rhAPC reduces mortality and/or morbidity in neonatal sepsis.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update searches were carried out in May 2011 of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and abstracts of annual meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies. Doctoral dissertations, theses and the Science Citation Index for articles on activated protein C were searched. No language restriction was applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized or quasi-randomized trials, assessing the efficacy of rhAPC compared to placebo or no intervention as an adjunct to antibiotic therapy of suspected or confirmed severe sepsis in term and preterm infants less than 28 days old. Eligible trials should report at least one of the following outcomes: mortality during initial hospital stay, neurodevelopmental assessment at two years of age or later, length of hospital stay, duration of ventilation, chronic lung disease, periventricular leukomalacia, intraventricular haemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, bleeding, and any other adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Review authors were to independently evaluate the articles for inclusion criteria and quality, and abstract information for the outcomes of interest. Differences were to be resolved by consensus. The statistical methods were to include relative risk, risk difference, number needed to treat to benefit or number needed to treat to harm for dichotomous and weighed mean difference for continuous outcomes reported with 95% confidence intervals. A fixed effect model was to be used for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity tests, including the I(2) statistic, were to be performed to assess the appropriateness of pooling the data.
MAIN RESULTS
No eligible trials were identified. In October 2011 rhAPC (Xigris®) was withdrawn from the market by Eli Lilly due to a higher mortality in a trial among adults. Xigris® (DrotAA)( rhAPC) should no longer be used in any age category and the product should be returned to the distributor.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the scientific rationale for its use, there is insufficient data to use rhAPC for the management of severe sepsis in newborn infants. Due to the results among adults with lack of efficacy, an increase in bleeding and resulting withdrawal of rhAPC from the market, neonates should not be treated with rhAPC and further trials should not be conducted.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Protein C; Recombinant Proteins; Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals; Sepsis
PubMed: 22513930
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005385.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2012Sepsis is a common and frequently fatal condition. Human recombinant activated protein C (APC) has been introduced to reduce the high risk of death associated with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sepsis is a common and frequently fatal condition. Human recombinant activated protein C (APC) has been introduced to reduce the high risk of death associated with severe sepsis or septic shock. This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
We assessed the benefits and harms of APC for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 6); MEDLINE (2010 to June 2012); EMBASE (2010 to June 2012); BIOSIS (1965 to June 2012); CINAHL (1982 to June 2012) and LILACS (1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis or septic shock in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. We considered all-cause mortality at day 28 and at the end of study follow up, and hospital mortality as the primary outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently performed trial selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. We used a random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified one new randomized clinical trial in this update which includes six randomized clinical trials involving 6781 participants in total, five randomized clinical trials in adult (N = 6307) and one randomized clinical trial in paediatric (N = 474) participants. All trials had high risk of bias and were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. APC compared with placebo did not significantly affect all-cause mortality at day 28 compared with placebo (780/3435 (22.7%) versus 767/3346 (22.9%); RR 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.16; I(2) = 56%). APC did not significantly affect in-hospital mortality (393/1767 (22.2%) versus 379/1710 (22.1%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; I(2) = 20%). APC was associated with an increased risk of serious bleeding (113/3424 (3.3%) versus 74/3343 (2.2%); RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.94; I(2) = 0%). APC did not significantly affect serious adverse events (463/3334 (13.9%) versus 439/3302 (13.2%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.18; I(2) = 0%). Trial sequential analyses showed that more trials do not seem to be needed for reliable conclusions regarding these outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. The drug company behind APC, Eli Lilly, has announced the discontinuation of all ongoing clinical trials using this drug for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC should not be used for sepsis or septic shock outside randomized clinical trials.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Anti-Infective Agents; Cause of Death; Child; Drug Recalls; Early Termination of Clinical Trials; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Protein C; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Sepsis; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 23235609
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004388.pub6 -
BMC Medicine Feb 2016There have been no studies of the patterns of post-marketing withdrawals of medicinal products to which adverse reactions have been attributed. We identified medicinal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There have been no studies of the patterns of post-marketing withdrawals of medicinal products to which adverse reactions have been attributed. We identified medicinal products that were withdrawn because of adverse drug reactions, examined the evidence to support such withdrawals, and explored the pattern of withdrawals across countries.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, the WHO's database of drugs, the websites of drug regulatory authorities, and textbooks. We included medicinal products withdrawn between 1950 and 2014 and assessed the levels of evidence used in making withdrawal decisions using the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine.
RESULTS
We identified 462 medicinal products that were withdrawn from the market between 1953 and 2013, the most common reason being hepatotoxicity. The supporting evidence in 72 % of cases consisted of anecdotal reports. Only 43 (9.34 %) drugs were withdrawn worldwide and 179 (39 %) were withdrawn in one country only. Withdrawal was significantly less likely in Africa than in other continents (Europe, the Americas, Asia, and Australasia and Oceania). The median interval between the first reported adverse reaction and the year of first withdrawal was 6 years (IQR, 1-15) and the interval did not consistently shorten over time.
CONCLUSION
There are discrepancies in the patterns of withdrawal of medicinal products from the market when adverse reactions are suspected, and withdrawals are inconsistent across countries. Greater co-ordination among drug regulatory authorities and increased transparency in reporting suspected adverse drug reactions would help improve current decision-making processes.
Topics: Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems; Africa; Americas; Asia; Australasia; Databases, Factual; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Europe; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Oceania; Publications; Safety-Based Drug Withdrawals
PubMed: 26843061
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-016-0553-2 -
Tobacco Regulatory Science Oct 2016In this paper we synthesize the evidence from eye tracking research in tobacco control to inform tobacco regulatory strategies and tobacco communication campaigns.
OBJECTIVE
In this paper we synthesize the evidence from eye tracking research in tobacco control to inform tobacco regulatory strategies and tobacco communication campaigns.
METHODS
We systematically searched 11 databases for studies that reported eye tracking outcomes in regards to tobacco regulation and communication. Two coders independently reviewed studies for inclusion and abstracted study characteristics and findings.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies met full criteria for inclusion. Eye tracking studies on health warnings consistently showed these warnings often were ignored, though eye tracking demonstrated that novel warnings, graphic warnings, and plain packaging can increase attention toward warnings. Eye tracking also revealed that greater visual attention to warnings on advertisements and packages consistently was associated with cognitive processing as measured by warning recall.
CONCLUSIONS
Eye tracking is a valid indicator of attention, cognitive processing, and memory. The use of this technology in tobacco control research complements existing methods in tobacco regulatory and communication science; it also can be used to examine the effects of health warnings and other tobacco product communications on consumer behavior in experimental settings prior to the implementation of novel health communication policies. However, the utility of eye tracking will be enhanced by the standardization of methodology and reporting metrics.
PubMed: 27668270
DOI: 10.18001/TRS.2.4.9