Evaluation of inter-rater agreement between three causality assessment methods used in pharmacovigilance
Saket J. Thaker1, Rahul S. Sinha1, Nithya J. Gogtay1★, Urmila M. Thatte1★ Corresponding author
- 1Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
CORRESPONDENCE
Nithya J. Gogtay
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Received: 23-12-2014; Revised: 02-02-2015; Accepted: 02-08-2015.
Volume 7, Issue 1 · pp. 31–3 · PUBLISHED 2016 · DOI: 10.4103/0976-500X.179361
ABSTRACT
Causality assessment is the evaluation of a possibility that a particular treatment is the cause of an adverse event. It plays a key role in pharmacovigilance both toward signal generation and risk benefit evaluation. There are several methods and algorithms for causality assessment, but none is considered the gold standard and use varies from country to country. This is due to inter-individual variation in using the methods as also varying sensitivities and specificities of each method. Bayesian methods of causality have greater credence but have lower acceptance as they are rigorous to perform and involve use of complex calculations. In the absence of a universally accepted method the present study was carried out to assess the intra- and inter-rater variations among three widely used causality methods—the WHO-UMC method (recommended by the Pharmacovigilance Program of India (PvPI)), Naranjo’s algorithm (a widely quoted method in case reports in literature) and the European ABO method (used in European Union to harmonize decision making). To the best of our knowledge, a study comparing these three methods has never been carried out.
KEYWORDS
REFERENCES
As publishedShowing references and in-text citations exactly as published.
Cite this article
SELECT FORMAT
Thaker, S. J., Sinha, R. S., Gogtay, N. J., & Thatte, U. M. (2016). Evaluation of inter-rater agreement between three causality assessment methods used in pharmacovigilance. Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics, 7(1), 31–3. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.179361