Aspects to consider in causality assessment of safety signals: broadening the thought process

T. Hammad, S. Afsar, Laura B. McAvoy, H. Le Louet
{"title":"Aspects to consider in causality assessment of safety signals: broadening the thought process","authors":"T. Hammad, S. Afsar, Laura B. McAvoy, H. Le Louet","doi":"10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1193413","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the field of drug safety, causality assessment aims to determine the level of plausibility of the relationship between an adverse event and exposure to a particular product. It is after the causality assessment process that we will be able to point out a product adverse reaction. While regulators often require pharmaceutical companies to use a structured approach for assessing the causality of their products, the available methods are challenged by a number of procedural differences, even when drawing from the same domain of elements. To mitigate these inconsistencies, as well as the additional challenges associated with incomplete information and differences in the application of clinical judgments at the individual case level, this paper proposes a holistic framework for causality assessment that utilizes a combination of expert judgment/global introspection, evidence-based medicine, and probabilistic method. The goal of the presented approach is to provide a guide of clues to causality reminding medical safety assessors to seek and examine all available streams of evidence in totality and to assess this evidence in a qualitative, structured way.","PeriodicalId":321587,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Drug Safety and Regulation","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Drug Safety and Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1193413","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In the field of drug safety, causality assessment aims to determine the level of plausibility of the relationship between an adverse event and exposure to a particular product. It is after the causality assessment process that we will be able to point out a product adverse reaction. While regulators often require pharmaceutical companies to use a structured approach for assessing the causality of their products, the available methods are challenged by a number of procedural differences, even when drawing from the same domain of elements. To mitigate these inconsistencies, as well as the additional challenges associated with incomplete information and differences in the application of clinical judgments at the individual case level, this paper proposes a holistic framework for causality assessment that utilizes a combination of expert judgment/global introspection, evidence-based medicine, and probabilistic method. The goal of the presented approach is to provide a guide of clues to causality reminding medical safety assessors to seek and examine all available streams of evidence in totality and to assess this evidence in a qualitative, structured way.
安全信号因果关系评估应考虑的方面:拓宽思维过程
在药物安全领域,因果关系评估的目的是确定不良事件与接触特定产品之间关系的合理程度。在因果关系评估过程之后,我们将能够指出产品的不良反应。虽然监管机构经常要求制药公司使用结构化方法来评估其产品的因果关系,但现有的方法受到许多程序差异的挑战,即使是从同一领域的元素中提取。为了减轻这些不一致,以及与不完整信息和临床判断在个案层面的应用差异相关的额外挑战,本文提出了一个综合利用专家判断/全局内省、循证医学和概率方法的因果关系评估整体框架。所提出的方法的目标是提供因果关系线索指南,提醒医疗安全评估人员寻求和审查所有可用的证据流,并以定性、结构化的方式评估这些证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信