• 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

相似文献

1
Comparison of two recently published algorithms for assessing the probability of adverse drug reactions.两种近期发表的用于评估药物不良反应概率的算法的比较。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1982 Feb;13(2):223-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1982.tb01361.x.
2
Evaluation of the reproducibility of the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale score in published case reports.已发表病例报告中Naranjo药物不良反应概率量表评分的可重复性评估。
Pharmacotherapy. 2014 Nov;34(11):1159-66. doi: 10.1002/phar.1496. Epub 2014 Sep 30.
3
Comparison of the Bayesian approach and a simple algorithm for assessment of adverse drug events.贝叶斯方法与一种评估药物不良事件的简单算法的比较。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1995 Dec;58(6):692-8. doi: 10.1016/0009-9236(95)90026-8.
4
Comparison of three algorithms used to evaluate adverse drug reactions.用于评估药物不良反应的三种算法的比较。
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1986 Jul;43(7):1709-14.
5
A quantitative approach of using genetic algorithm in designing a probability scoring system of an adverse drug reaction assessment system.一种在设计药物不良反应评估系统的概率评分系统中使用遗传算法的定量方法。
Int J Med Inform. 2008 Jun;77(6):421-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2007.08.010. Epub 2007 Oct 24.
6
Consistency of assessment of adverse drug reactions in psychiatric hospitals: a comparison of an algorithmic and an empirical approach.精神病医院药物不良反应评估的一致性:算法方法与经验方法的比较
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1986;30(2):199-204. doi: 10.1007/BF00614303.
7
An algorithm to detect adverse drug reactions in the neonatal intensive care unit.一种用于检测新生儿重症监护病房中药物不良反应的算法。
J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Jan;53(1):87-95. doi: 10.1177/0091270011433327. Epub 2013 Jan 24.
8
Misuse of the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale in toxicology.滥用 Naranjo 药物不良反应概率量表进行毒理学研究。
Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2013 Jul;51(6):461-6. doi: 10.3109/15563650.2013.811588. Epub 2013 Jun 18.
9
Evaluation of naranjo adverse drug reactions probability scale in causality assessment of drug-induced liver injury.用于药物性肝损伤因果关系评估的Naranjo药物不良反应概率量表评价
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 May;27(9):780-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03655.x. Epub 2008 Feb 18.
10
An intensive drug monitoring study suggesting possible clinical irrelevance of impaired drug disposition in liver disease.一项强化药物监测研究表明,肝脏疾病中药物处置受损可能与临床无关。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1983 Apr;15(4):451-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1983.tb01529.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Methylphenidate and the Paradox of Sedation: A Case Report.哌甲酯与镇静悖论:一例报告
Indian J Psychol Med. 2025 Apr 23:02537176251332231. doi: 10.1177/02537176251332231.
2
Adverse Drug Reactions in Psychiatry Outpatient Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Western Uttar Pradesh: An Observational Study.印度北方邦西部一家三级护理医院精神科门诊的药物不良反应:一项观察性研究
J Res Pharm Pract. 2023 Mar 24;11(3):99-102. doi: 10.4103/jrpp.jrpp_51_22. eCollection 2022 Jul-Sep.
3
Leukoencephalopathy During Daratumumab-Based Therapy: A Case Series of Two Patients with Multiple Myeloma.基于达雷妥尤单抗治疗期间的白质脑病:两例多发性骨髓瘤患者的病例系列
Onco Targets Ther. 2022 Sep 6;15:953-962. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S365657. eCollection 2022.
4
Clinical safety and pharmacokinetic evaluation of aqueous extract of an anti-viral phytopharmacetical drug as a potential for the treatment of dengue and COVID-19.一种抗病毒植物药水性提取物治疗登革热和新冠肺炎潜力的临床安全性和药代动力学评价
Heliyon. 2022 May;8(5):e09416. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09416. Epub 2022 May 13.
5
Microangiopathy associated with gemcitabine: a drug interaction with nab-paclitaxel? A case series and literature review.吉西他滨相关的微血管病变:与纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇存在药物相互作用?病例系列及文献综述
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Jul;78(7):1087-1093. doi: 10.1007/s00228-022-03324-z. Epub 2022 May 4.
6
Improving the assessment of adverse drug reactions using the Naranjo Algorithm in daily practice: The Japan Adverse Drug Events Study.利用 Naranjo 算法在日常实践中改进药物不良反应评估:日本药物不良事件研究。
Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2018 Feb;6(1). doi: 10.1002/prp2.373.
7
Methods for estimating causal relationships of adverse events with dietary supplements.评估膳食补充剂不良事件因果关系的方法。
BMJ Open. 2015 Nov 25;5(11):e009038. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009038.
8
Ventricular Tachycardia Precipitated by the Use of the Diet Supplement Hydroxycut Gummies.食用膳食补充剂Hydroxycut软糖引发的室性心动过速
Hosp Pharm. 2015 Jul;50(7):615-8. doi: 10.1310/hpj5007-615. Epub 2015 Jul 31.
9
A simplified way for the urgent treatment of somatic pain in patients admitted to the emergency room: the SUPER algorithm.急诊室收治患者躯体疼痛紧急治疗的一种简化方法:SUPER算法。
Intern Emerg Med. 2015 Dec;10(8):985-92. doi: 10.1007/s11739-015-1304-7. Epub 2015 Sep 4.
10
Annual report on adverse events related with vaccines use in Calabria (Italy): 2012.意大利卡拉布里亚地区2012年疫苗使用相关不良事件年度报告。
J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2013 Dec;4(Suppl 1):S61-5. doi: 10.4103/0976-500X.120951.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical biostatistics. LIV. The biostatistics of concordance.临床生物统计学。第四十一部分。一致性的生物统计学。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981 Jan;29(1):111-23. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1981.18.
2
A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions.一种估算药物不良反应概率的方法。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981 Aug;30(2):239-45. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1981.154.
3
Intensive hospital monitoring of adverse reactions to drugs.医院对药物不良反应进行强化监测。
Br Med J. 1969 Mar 1;1(5643):531-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5643.531.
4
Hospital admissions due to adverse drug reactions. A report from the Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program.因药物不良反应导致的住院情况。波士顿药物监测协作计划的一份报告。
Arch Intern Med. 1974 Aug;134(2):219-23.
5
Adverse drug reactions-a matter of opinion.药物不良反应——一个见仁见智的问题。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1976 May;19(5 Pt 1):489-92. doi: 10.1002/cpt1976195part1489.
6
Adverse drug reactions. A critical review.药物不良反应。一篇批判性综述。
JAMA. 1975 Dec 22;234(12):1236-41.
7
The ambiguity of adverse drug reactions.药物不良反应的模糊性。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1977 Jan 3;11(2):75-8. doi: 10.1007/BF00562895.
8
Toward the operational identification of adverse drug reactions.迈向药物不良反应的操作性识别。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1977 Mar;21(3):247-54. doi: 10.1002/cpt1977213247.
9
An algorithm for the operational assessment of adverse drug reactions. II. Demonstration of reproducibility and validity.药物不良反应操作评估算法。II. 再现性和有效性的论证。
JAMA. 1979 Aug 17;242(7):633-8.
10
An algorithm for the operational assessment of adverse drug reactions. I. Background, description, and instructions for use.药物不良反应操作评估算法。I. 背景、描述及使用说明。
JAMA. 1979 Aug 17;242(7):623-32.

两种近期发表的用于评估药物不良反应概率的算法的比较。

Comparison of two recently published algorithms for assessing the probability of adverse drug reactions.

作者信息

Busto U, Naranjo C A, Sellers E M

出版信息

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1982 Feb;13(2):223-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1982.tb01361.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2125.1982.tb01361.x
PMID:7059419
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1401984/
Abstract

1 A simple valid and reliable method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions (adverse drug reactions probability scale, APS) has been recently described (Naranjo et al., 1981a). 2 The results using APS were compared to those obtained with another more detailed algorithm (adverse reactions scoring system, ASS) described by Kramer et al. (1979). 3 Sixty-three randomly selected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were rated by two observers, using APS and ASS one year apart. The cases were ordered in a random sequence. Between-raters reliability using APS (R(est) = 0.96 and ASS (R(est) = 0.86), was very high. 4 ADR scores obtained with both methods were highly correlated (r = 0.82, P less than 0.001). However, time spent using ASS was significantly longer (paired t-test, t = 1.70, P less than 0.05). 5 These results suggest that while ASS is somewhat more complex than APS both are equally reliable and will give very similar conclusions regarding the probability of ADRs. Such algorithms must be used if the clinical assessment of ADRs is to become acceptably reliable.

摘要
  1. 最近描述了一种简单、有效且可靠的估计药物不良反应概率的方法(药物不良反应概率量表,APS)(纳兰霍等人,1981a)。2. 将使用APS的结果与用另一种更详细的算法(不良反应评分系统,ASS)所获得的结果进行比较,该算法由克莱默等人(1979)描述。3. 两名观察者对63例随机选择的药物不良反应(ADR)进行评分,使用APS和ASS,时间间隔为一年。病例按随机顺序排列。使用APS时评分者间信度(R(est)=0.96)和使用ASS时评分者间信度(R(est)=0.86)都非常高。4. 两种方法获得的ADR评分高度相关(r=0.82,P<0.001)。然而,使用ASS花费的时间明显更长(配对t检验,t=1.70,P<0.05)。5. 这些结果表明,虽然ASS比APS稍微复杂一些,但两者同样可靠,并且在ADR概率方面会得出非常相似的结论。如果要使ADR的临床评估达到可接受的可靠性,就必须使用这样的算法。