Journal
PLOS ONE
Volume 6, Issue 12, Pages -Publisher
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028096
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [RP-PG-0606-1170]
- National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [RP-PG-0606-1170] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)
- National Institute for Health Research [RP-PG-0606-1170] Funding Source: researchfish
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Aim: To develop and test a new adverse drug reaction (ADR) causality assessment tool (CAT). Methods: A comparison between seven assessors of a new CAT, formulated by an expert focus group, compared with the Naranjo CAT in 80 cases from a prospective observational study and 37 published ADR case reports (819 causality assessments in total). Main Outcome Measures: Utilisation of causality categories, measure of disagreements, inter-rater reliability (IRR). Results: The Liverpool ADR CAT, using 40 cases from an observational study, showed causality categories of 1 unlikely, 62 possible, 92 probable and 125 definite (1, 62, 92, 125) and 'moderate' IRR (kappa 0.48), compared to Naranjo (0, 100, 172, 8) with 'moderate' IRR (kappa 0.45). In a further 40 cases, the Liverpool tool (0, 66, 81, 133) showed 'good' IRR (kappa 0.6) while Naranjo (1, 90, 185, 4) remained 'moderate'. Conclusion: The Liverpool tool assigns the full range of causality categories and shows good IRR. Further assessment by different investigators in different settings is needed to fully assess the utility of this tool.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available