↓ Skip to main content

Hypothesis-free screening of large administrative databases for unsuspected drug-outcome associations

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Epidemiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Hypothesis-free screening of large administrative databases for unsuspected drug-outcome associations
Published in
European Journal of Epidemiology, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10654-018-0386-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jesper Hallas, Shirley V. Wang, Joshua J. Gagne, Sebastian Schneeweiss, Nicole Pratt, Anton Pottegård

Abstract

Active surveillance for unknown or unsuspected adverse drug effects may be carried out by applying epidemiological techniques to large administrative databases. Self-controlled designs, like the symmetry design, have the advantage over conventional design of adjusting for confounders that are stable over time. The aim of this paper was to describe the output of a comprehensive open-ended symmetry analysis of a large dataset. All drug dispensings and all secondary care contacts in Denmark during the period 1995-2012 for persons born before 1950 were analyzed by a symmetry design. We analyzed all drug-drug sequences and all drug-disease sequences occurring during the study period. The identified associations were ranked according to the number of outcomes that potentially could be attributed to the exposure. In the main analysis, 29,891,212 incident drug therapies, and 21,300,000 incident diagnoses were included. Out of 186,758 associations tested in the main analysis, 43,575 (23.3%) showed meaningful effect size. For the top 200 drug-drug associations, 47% represented unknown associations, 24% represented known adverse drug reactions, 30% were explained by mutual indication or reverse causation. For the top 200 drug-disease associations the proportions were 31, 15, and 55%, respectively. Screening by symmetry analysis can be a useful starting point for systematic pharmacovigilance activities if coupled with a systematic post-hoc review of signals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 29%
Researcher 5 21%
Other 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 21%
Mathematics 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,852,402
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Epidemiology
#1,302
of 1,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,179
of 329,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Epidemiology
#28
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.