Dataset Information

Differential completeness of spontaneous adverse event reports among hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies in South Korea.

ABSTRACT: The differential pattern and characteristics of completeness in adverse event (AE) reports generated by hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumer and pharmaceutical companies remain unknown. Thus, we identified the characteristics of complete AE reports, compared with those of incomplete AE reports, using a completeness score. We used Korea Institute of Drug Safety and Risk Management-Korea Adverse Event Reporting System Database (KIDS-KD) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. The completeness score was determined out of a total of 100 points, based on the presence of information on temporal relationships, age and sex of patients, AE progress, name of reported medication, reporting group by profession, causality assessment, and informational text. AE reports were organized into four groups based on affiliation: hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies. Affiliations that had median completeness scores greater than 80 points were classified as 'well-documented' and these reports were further analyzed by logistic regression to estimate the adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. We examined 228,848 individual reports and 735,745 drug-AE combinations. The median values of the completeness scores were the highest for hospitals/clinics (95 points), followed by those for consumers (85), pharmacies (75), and manufacturers (72). Reports with causality assessment of 'certain', 'probable', or 'possible' were more likely to be 'well-documented' than reports that had causality assessments of 'unlikely'. Serious reports of AEs were positively associated with 'well-documented' reports and negatively associated with hospitals/clinics.

SUBMITTER: Oh IS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6375612 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Differential completeness of spontaneous adverse event reports among hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies in South Korea.

Oh In-Sun IS Baek Yeon-Hee YH Kim Hye-Jun HJ Lee Mose M Shin Ju-Young JY

PloS one 20190214 2

The differential pattern and characteristics of completeness in adverse event (AE) reports generated by hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumer and pharmaceutical companies remain unknown. Thus, we identified the characteristics of complete AE reports, compared with those of incomplete AE reports, using a completeness score. We used Korea Institute of Drug Safety and Risk Management-Korea Adverse Event Reporting System Database (KIDS-KD) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. The complet ...[more]

PMID: 30763386

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Understanding the profitability of pharmaceutical companies is essential to formulating evidence-based policies to reduce drug costs while maintaining the industry's ability to innovate and provide essential medicines. Objective:To compare the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies with other large companies. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study compared the annual profits of 35 large pharmaceutical companies with 357 companies in the S&P 500 Index from 2000 to 2018 using information from annual financial reports. A statistically significant differential profit margin favoring pharmaceutical companies was evidence of greater profitability. Exposures:Large pharmaceutical vs nonpharmaceutical companies. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes were revenue and 3 measures of annual profit: gross profit (revenue minus the cost of goods sold); earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA; pretax profit from core business activities); and net income, also referred to as earnings (difference between all revenues and expenses). Profit measures are described as cumulative for all companies from 2000 to 2018 or annual profit as a fraction of revenue (margin). Results:From 2000 to 2018, 35 large pharmaceutical companies reported cumulative revenue of $11.5 trillion, gross profit of $8.6 trillion, EBITDA of $3.7 trillion, and net income of $1.9 trillion, while 357 S&P 500 companies reported cumulative revenue of $130.5 trillion, gross profit of $42.1 trillion, EBITDA of $22.8 trillion, and net income of $9.4 trillion. In bivariable regression models, the median annual profit margins of pharmaceutical companies were significantly greater than those of S&P 500 companies (gross profit margin: 76.5% vs 37.4%; difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 32.5%-45.7%]; P?<?.001; EBITDA margin: 29.4% vs 19%; difference, 10.4% [95% CI, 7.1%-13.7%]; P?<?.001; net income margin: 13.8% vs 7.7%; difference, 6.1% [95% CI, 2.5%-9.7%]; P?<?.001). The differences were smaller in regression models controlling for company size and year and when considering only companies reporting research and development expense (gross profit margin: difference, 30.5% [95% CI, 20.9%-40.1%]; P?<?.001; EBITDA margin: difference, 9.2% [95% CI, 5.2%-13.2%]; P?<?.001; net income margin: difference, 3.6% [95% CI, 0.011%-7.2%]; P?=?.05). Conclusions and Relevance:From 2000 to 2018, the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies was significantly greater than other large, public companies, but the difference was less pronounced when considering company size, year, or research and development expense. Data on the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies may be relevant to formulating evidence-based policies to make medicines more affordable.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough critical to patient safety, health care-related allergic reactions are challenging to identify and monitor.ObjectiveTo develop a deep learning model to identify allergic reactions in the free-text narrative of hospital safety reports and evaluate its generalizability, efficiency, productivity, and interpretability.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study analyzed hospital safety reports filed between May 2004 and January 2019 at Brigham and Women's Hospital and between April 2006 and June 2018 at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. Training and validating a deep learning model involved extracting safety reports using 101 expert-curated keywords from Massachusetts General Hospital (data set I). The model was then evaluated on 3 data sets: reports without keywords (data set II), reports from a different time frame (data set III), and reports from a different hospital (Brigham and Women's Hospital; data set IV). Statistical analyses were performed between March 1, 2019, and July 18, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the precision-recall curve were used on data set I. The precision at top-k was used on data sets II to IV.ResultsA total of 299 028 safety reports with 172 854 patients were included. Of these patients, 86 544 were women (50.1%) and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 59.7 (43.8-71.6) years. The deep learning model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.979 (95% CI, 0.973-0.985) and an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.809 (95% CI, 0.773-0.845). The model achieved precisions at the top 100 model-identified cases of 0.930 in data set II, 0.960 in data set III, and 0.990 in data set IV. Compared with the keyword-search approach, the deep learning model reduced the number of cases for manual review by 63.8% and identified 24.2% more cases of confirmed allergic reactions. The model highlighted important words (eg, rash, hives, and Benadryl) in prediction and extended the list of expert-curated keywords through an attention layer.Conclusions and relevanceThis study showed that a deep learning model can accurately and efficiently identify allergic reactions using free-text narratives written by a variety of health care professionals. This model could be used to improve allergy care, potentially enabling real-time event surveillance and guidance for medical errors and system improvement.

Project description:BackgroundOncologists who author clinical practice guidelines frequently have financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. It is unknown whether participation on clinical practice guideline committees is associated with differences in the amounts of industry money received.Materials and methodsWe conducted a nested case-control study from August 2013 to December 2018. We manually abstracted membership records of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines committees for the 20 most common cancers and linked to Open Payments. The study sample included medical oncologists selected to join an NCCN Guidelines committee ("joiners") during the study period. Joiners were matched 1:2 to medical oncologists who had no participation on NCCN committees (controls) by gender, NCCN institution, and medical school graduation year. We performed difference-in-differences (DiD) estimation to assess whether selection to an NCCN committee was associated with the dollar value of payments received from industry, using generalized estimating equations to address correlation between matched pairs and between repeated observations of the same pair.ResultsDuring the study period, 54 physicians joined an NCCN Guidelines committee. These physicians received more payments than matched controls in the year prior to joining ($11,259 vs. $3,427; p = .02); this difference did not increase in the year after joining (DiD = $731; p = .45).ConclusionMedical oncologists selected to NCCN Guidelines committees had greater financial ties to industry than their peers. The potential influence of industry in oncology clinical practice guidelines may be reduced through the selection of committee members with fewer ties to industry.Implications for practiceOncologists who author clinical practice guidelines frequently have financial conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. This creates concern about the potential for industry influence on guidelines. However, it is unknown whether oncologists who author guidelines have greater industry relationships than their peers. This study compared medical oncologists who were newly selected to join a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines panel with medical oncologists at the same institutions and at similar career stages. At the time they joined, oncologists joining NCCN Guidelines panels had received more than three times the dollar value of industry payments than their peers. The potential for industry influence may be reduced by the selection of less-conflicted panel members.

Project description:Introduction: Quality reporting was initially implemented to offer a better means of assessing hospitals and to provide patients with information to help them when choosing their hospital. Quality reports are published every 2 years and include parameters describing the hospital's structure and general infrastructure together with specific data on individual specialised departments or clinics. Method: This study investigated the 2010 quality reports of German university hospitals published online, focussing on the following data: number of inpatients treated by the hospital, focus of care provided by the unit/department, range of medical services and care provided by the unit/department, non-medical services provided by the unit/department, number of cases treated in the unit/department, ICD diagnoses, OPS procedures, number of outpatient procedures, day surgeries as defined by Section 115b SGB V, presence of an accident insurance consultant and number of staff employed. Results: University gynaecology clinics (UGCs) treat 10?% (range: 6-17?%) of all inpatients of their respective university hospital. There were no important differences in infrastructure between clinics. All UGCs offered full medical care and were specialist clinics for gynaecology (surgery, breast centres, genital cancer, urogynaecology, endoscopy), obstetrics (prenatal diagnostics, high-risk obstetrics); many were also specialist clinics for endocrinology and reproductive medicine. On average, each clinic employs 32 physicians (range: 16-78). Half of them (30-77?%) are specialists. Around 171 (117-289) inpatients are treated on average per physician. The most common ICD coded treatments were deliveries and treatment of infants. Gynaecological diagnoses are underrepresented. Summary: UGCs treat 10?% of all inpatients treated in university hospitals, making them important ports of entry for their respective university hospital. Around half of the physicians are specialists. Quality reports offer little information on the differences in competencies or medical specialties. The statutory quality reports are not useful for patients and referring physicians when choosing a clinic.

Dataset Information

Differential completeness of spontaneous adverse event reports among hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies in South Korea.

Publications

Differential completeness of spontaneous adverse event reports among hospitals/clinics, pharmacies, consumers, and pharmaceutical companies in South Korea.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure