• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

药物安全性术语的阐释

Clarification of terminology in drug safety.

作者信息

Aronson Jeffrey K, Ferner Robin E

机构信息

Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Drug Saf. 2005;28(10):851-70. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200528100-00003.

DOI:10.2165/00002018-200528100-00003
PMID:16180936
Abstract

Nomenclature surrounding drug safety needs to be clear and unambiguous, so that patients, prescribers, manufacturers, and regulators can all understand each other. In particular, it needs to make it clear how adverse events and drug therapy are related to one another, how they are best classified, and their frequency, intensity and seriousness. In this article, we therefore discuss and define terms used in the field of drug safety, particularly terms that are sometimes misunderstood or misused, including medicinal product, pharmaceutical formulation, excipient, adverse event (or experience) and adverse drug reaction (or effect). We also discuss terms used to define the seriousness, intensity, and risk of adverse reactions, and their classification. Instead of creating definitions from scratch, as is commonly done, we have taken the novel approach of critically examining definitions that have been proposed or widely used and have formulated new or modified definitions based on a logical appraisal of their merits and demerits. We hope that these definitions will lead to discussion that will allow a corpus of satisfactory definitions to be widely agreed.

摘要

围绕药物安全性的术语必须清晰明确,以便患者、开处方者、制造商和监管机构都能相互理解。特别是,需要明确不良事件与药物治疗之间的关系、它们的最佳分类方式以及发生频率、强度和严重程度。因此,在本文中,我们将讨论并定义药物安全领域中使用的术语,尤其是那些有时被误解或误用的术语,包括药品、药物制剂、辅料、不良事件(或经历)和药物不良反应(或效应)。我们还将讨论用于定义不良反应的严重程度、强度和风险及其分类的术语。我们没有像通常那样从头开始创建定义,而是采用了一种新颖的方法,即批判性地审视已提出或广泛使用的定义,并根据对其优缺点的逻辑评估制定新的或经过修改的定义。我们希望这些定义能引发讨论,从而使一套令人满意的定义得到广泛认可。

相似文献

1
Clarification of terminology in drug safety.药物安全性术语的阐释
Drug Saf. 2005;28(10):851-70. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200528100-00003.
2
Clarification of terminology in medication errors: definitions and classification.用药错误术语的澄清:定义与分类
Drug Saf. 2006;29(11):1011-22. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200629110-00001.
3
Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management.药物不良反应:定义、诊断与处理
Lancet. 2000 Oct 7;356(9237):1255-9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02799-9.
4
Adverse effects of pharmaceutical excipients in drug therapy.药物治疗中药物辅料的不良反应。
Ann Acad Med Singap. 1993 Jan;22(1):99-102.
5
An Overview of Pharmaceutical Excipients: Safe or Not Safe?药用辅料概述:安全与否?
J Pharm Sci. 2016 Jul;105(7):2019-26. doi: 10.1016/j.xphs.2016.03.019. Epub 2016 Jun 1.
6
[Adverse drug reactions definitions and terminology].[药品不良反应的定义和术语]
Harefuah. 2001 Dec;140(12):1181-6, 1228.
7
Developing a taxonomy for research in adverse drug events: potholes and signposts.构建药品不良事件研究的分类法:陷阱与路标
Proc AMIA Symp. 2001:493-7.
8
Clarifying adverse drug events: a clinician's guide to terminology, documentation, and reporting.澄清药物不良事件:临床医生术语、记录与报告指南
Ann Intern Med. 2004 May 18;140(10):795-801. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-140-10-200405180-00009.
9
Formalizing MedDRA to support semantic reasoning on adverse drug reaction terms.规范医学术语词典(MedDRA)以支持对药品不良反应术语进行语义推理。
J Biomed Inform. 2014 Jun;49:282-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2014.03.012. Epub 2014 Mar 25.
10
Points of view on adverse drug reactions terminology.关于药品不良反应术语的观点。
Therapie. 1998 Mar-Apr;53(2):145-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Pragmatic and contextualized methods selection for safety assessment of infant systemic exposure through human milk: the Milk4baby decision tree approach - a contribution from the concePTION project.通过母乳对婴儿全身暴露进行安全性评估的实用且情境化的方法选择:Milk4baby决策树方法——来自concePTION项目的贡献
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 5;16:1602018. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1602018. eCollection 2025.
2
A Pathway to Healthier Aging or an Illusion? A Narrative Review on Deprescribing Protocols for the Elderly.通往健康老龄化之路还是一种幻想?关于老年人减药方案的叙述性综述
Sage Open Aging. 2025 Jun 9;11:30495334251345091. doi: 10.1177/30495334251345091. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the member states relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use.欧洲议会和理事会2001年4月4日关于协调各成员国有关在人用药品临床试验实施中适用良好临床实践的法律、法规及行政规定的第2001/20/EC号指令。
Med Etika Bioet. 2002 Spring-Summer;9(1-2):12-9.
2
What is a clinical trial?什么是临床试验?
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Jul;58(1):1-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02184.x.
3
Agreement and correlation between WHO-UMC Causality scale and the Naranjo algorithm for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions at tertiary care center in Northern India.
印度北部三级医疗中心中,世界卫生组织药物不良反应因果关系评估量表(WHO-UMC)与纳朗霍算法在药物不良反应因果关系评估方面的一致性和相关性。
J Family Med Prim Care. 2025 Apr;14(4):1252-1258. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1148_24. Epub 2025 Apr 25.
4
Chemotherapy-related adverse drug reaction and associated factors among adult cancer patient attending Jimma medical center oncology unit, Southwest Ethiopia.埃塞俄比亚西南部吉马医疗中心肿瘤科成年癌症患者中与化疗相关的药物不良反应及相关因素
PLoS One. 2025 May 16;20(5):e0321785. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321785. eCollection 2025.
5
Severe adverse reactions to benzathine penicillin G in rheumatic heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.风湿性心脏病患者对苄星青霉素G的严重不良反应:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2025 May 7;20(5):e0322873. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0322873. eCollection 2025.
6
Clinical Study Reports-a systematic review with thematic synthesis: Part 2. Studying benefits, harms, and the benefit to harm balance of pharmacological interventions.临床研究报告——一项采用主题综合法的系统评价:第2部分。研究药物干预措施的益处、危害及利弊平衡。
Trials. 2025 May 1;26(1):145. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08671-z.
7
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.《SPIRIT 2025解释与阐述:随机试验方案更新指南》
BMJ. 2025 Apr 28;389:e081660. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081660.
8
Long-Term Effectiveness and Safety of Ustekinumab Dose Escalation in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.乌司奴单抗剂量递增疗法用于中重度溃疡性结肠炎患者的长期有效性及安全性:一项多中心回顾性队列研究
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Mar 17. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-08977-1.
9
Antiseizure Medications: Advancements, Challenges, and Prospects in Drug Development.抗癫痫药物:药物研发的进展、挑战与前景
Curr Neuropharmacol. 2025;23(8):879-906. doi: 10.2174/011570159X323666241029171256.
10
Improving ADR reporting in Jordan: a qualitative exploration of pharmacists' perspectives.改善约旦的药品不良反应报告:对药剂师观点的定性探索。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Jan 6;11:1513611. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1513611. eCollection 2024.
From association to alert--a revised approach to international signal analysis.
从关联到警示——国际信号分析的修订方法
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 1999 Apr;8 Suppl 1:S15-25. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1557(199904)8:1+<s15::aid-pds402>3.3.co;2-2.
4
Should 'idiosyncrasy' be defined as equivalent to 'type B' adverse drug reactions?“特异反应性”是否应被定义为等同于“B型”药物不良反应?
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 1997 May;6(3):213. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1557(199705)6:3<213::AID-PDS269>3.0.CO;2-5.
5
Joining the DoTS: new approach to classifying adverse drug reactions.加入药物不良反应术语集:药物不良反应分类的新方法。
BMJ. 2003 Nov 22;327(7425):1222-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7425.1222.
6
Communicating risks through analogies.通过类比传达风险。
BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):749. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7417.749.
7
Strategies to help patients understand risks.帮助患者理解风险的策略。
BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):745-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7417.745.
8
10-minute consultation: adverse drug event.10分钟会诊:药物不良事件
BMJ. 2003 May 10;326(7397):1018. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7397.1018.
9
The SNOMED clinical terms development process: refinement and analysis of content.SNOMED临床术语开发过程:内容的细化与分析
Proc AMIA Symp. 2002:845-9.
10
A systematic review of the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and barriers to implementation of thrombolytic and neuroprotective therapy for acute ischaemic stroke in the NHS.对英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)中急性缺血性卒中溶栓和神经保护治疗的有效性、成本效益及实施障碍的系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(26):1-112. doi: 10.3310/hta6260.