↓ Skip to main content

Electronic Health Data for Postmarket Surveillance: A Vision Not Realized

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
Electronic Health Data for Postmarket Surveillance: A Vision Not Realized
Published in
Drug Safety, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40264-015-0305-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas J. Moore, Curt D. Furberg

Abstract

What has been learned about electronic health data as a primary data source for regulatory decisions regarding the harms of drugs? Observational studies with electronic health data for postmarket risk assessment can now be conducted in Europe and the US in patient populations numbering in the tens of millions compared with a few hundred patients in a typical clinical trial. With standard protocols, results can be obtained in a few months; however, extensive research published by scores of investigators has illuminated the many obstacles that prevent obtaining robust, reproducible results that are reliable enough to be a primary source for drug safety decisions involving the health and safety of millions of patients. The most widely used terminology for coding patient interactions with medical providers for payment has proved ill-suited to identifying the adverse effects of drugs. Directly conflicting results were reported in otherwise similar patient health databases, even using identical event definitions and research methods. Evaluation of some accepted statistical methods revealed systematic bias, while others appeared to be unreliable. When electronic health data studies detected no drug risk, there were no robust and accepted standards to judge whether the drug was unlikely to cause the adverse effect or whether the study was incapable of detecting it. Substantial investment and careful thinking is needed to improve the reliability of risk assessments based on electronic health data, and current limitations need to be fully understood.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 32%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Mathematics 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 21 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#1,141,375
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#98
of 1,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,490
of 267,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#2
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 267,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.