Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Drug Safety 1/2014

Open Access 01-01-2014 | Original Research Article

vigiGrade: A Tool to Identify Well-Documented Individual Case Reports and Highlight Systematic Data Quality Issues

Authors: Tomas Bergvall, G. Niklas Norén, Marie Lindquist

Published in: Drug Safety | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Individual case safety reports of suspected harm from medicines are fundamental to post-marketing surveillance. Their value is directly proportional to the amount of clinically relevant information they include. To improve the quality of the data, communication between stakeholders is essential and can be facilitated by a simple score and visualisation of the results.

Objective

The objective of this study was to propose a measure of completeness and identify predictors of well-documented reports, globally.

Methods

The Uppsala Monitoring Centre has developed the vigiGrade completeness score to measure the amount of clinically relevant information in structured format, without reflecting whether the information establishes causality between the drug and adverse event. The vigiGrade completeness score (C) starts at 1 for reports with information on time-to-onset, age, sex, indication, outcome, report type, dose, country, primary reporter and comments. For each missing dimension, a penalty is detracted which varies with clinical relevance. We classified reports with C > 0.8 as well-documented and identified all such reports in the WHO global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, from 2007 to January 2012. We utilised odds ratios with statistical shrinkage to identify subgroups with unexpectedly high proportions of well-documented reports.

Results

Altogether, 430,000 (13 %) of the studied reports achieved C > 0.8 in VigiBase. For VigiBase as a whole, the median completeness was 0.41 with an interquartile range of 0.26–0.63. Two out of three well-documented reports come from Europe, and two out of three from physicians. Among the countries with more than 1,000 reports in total, the highest rate of well-documented reports is 65 % in Italy. Tunisia, Spain, Portugal, Croatia and Denmark each have rates above 50 %, and another 20 countries have rates above 30 %. On the whole, 24 % of the reports from physicians are well-documented compared with only 4 % for consumers/non-health professionals. Notably, Denmark and Norway have more than 50 % well-documented reports from consumers/non-health professionals and higher rates than for physicians. The rate of well-documented reports for the E2B format is 11 % compared with 22 % for the older INTDIS (International Drug Information System) format. However, for E2B reports entered via the WHO programme’s e-reporting system VigiFlow, the rate is 29 %.

Conclusion

Overall, only one report in eight provides the desired level of information, but much higher proportions are observed for individual countries. Physicians and e-reporting tools also generate greater proportions of well-documented reports overall. Reports from consumers/non-health professionals in specific regions have excellent quality, which illustrates their potential for the future. vigiGrade has already provided valuable information by highlighting data quality issues both in Italy and the USA.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
This choice of shrinkage provides adaptability to the size of the case series to be analysed and has proven useful in empirical studies; results not shown here.
 
2
All numbers in this section are rounded to two significant figures.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356(9237):1255–9.PubMedCrossRef Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356(9237):1255–9.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Edwards IR, Lindquist M, Wiholm BE, Napke E. Quality criteria for early signals of possible adverse drug reactions. Lancet. 1990;336(8708):156–8.PubMedCrossRef Edwards IR, Lindquist M, Wiholm BE, Napke E. Quality criteria for early signals of possible adverse drug reactions. Lancet. 1990;336(8708):156–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Star K, Bate A, Meyboom RH, Edwards IR. Pneumonia following antipsychotic prescriptions in electronic health records: a patient safety concern? Br J Gen Pract. 2010;60(579):385–94.CrossRef Star K, Bate A, Meyboom RH, Edwards IR. Pneumonia following antipsychotic prescriptions in electronic health records: a patient safety concern? Br J Gen Pract. 2010;60(579):385–94.CrossRef
10.
12.
go back to reference Lindquist M. Seeing and observing in international pharmacovigilance—achievements and prospects in worldwide drug safety. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen; 2003. Lindquist M. Seeing and observing in international pharmacovigilance—achievements and prospects in worldwide drug safety. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen; 2003.
13.
go back to reference Agbabiaka TB, Savović J, Harris R, Ernst E. The development of a tool to assess the quality of case reports of adverse events. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2008;20(3):123–33. Agbabiaka TB, Savović J, Harris R, Ernst E. The development of a tool to assess the quality of case reports of adverse events. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2008;20(3):123–33.
16.
go back to reference de Langen J, van Hunsel F, Passier A, de Jong-van den Berg L, van Grootheest K. Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience. Drug Saf. 2008;31(6):515–24.PubMedCrossRef de Langen J, van Hunsel F, Passier A, de Jong-van den Berg L, van Grootheest K. Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience. Drug Saf. 2008;31(6):515–24.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Harmark L, Lie-Kwie M, Berm L, de Gier H, van Grootheest K. Patients’ motives for participating in active post-marketing surveillance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;22(1):70–6. doi:10.1002/pds.3327.PubMedCrossRef Harmark L, Lie-Kwie M, Berm L, de Gier H, van Grootheest K. Patients’ motives for participating in active post-marketing surveillance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;22(1):70–6. doi:10.​1002/​pds.​3327.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Norén GN, Edwards R. Opportunities and challenges of adverse drug reaction surveillance in electronic patient records. Pharmacovigil Rev. 2010;4(1):17–20. Norén GN, Edwards R. Opportunities and challenges of adverse drug reaction surveillance in electronic patient records. Pharmacovigil Rev. 2010;4(1):17–20.
Metadata
Title
vigiGrade: A Tool to Identify Well-Documented Individual Case Reports and Highlight Systematic Data Quality Issues
Authors
Tomas Bergvall
G. Niklas Norén
Marie Lindquist
Publication date
01-01-2014
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Drug Safety / Issue 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0114-5916
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1942
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0131-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Drug Safety 1/2014 Go to the issue