alexa A study of agreement between the Naranjo algorithm and WHO-UMC criteria for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions.


Brain Disorders & Therapy

Author(s): Belhekar MN, Taur SR, Munshi RP

Abstract Share this page

Abstract OBJECTIVES: Reliability and usefulness of various adverse drug reaction (ADR) causality assessment scales have not been fully explored. There is no universally accepted method for causality grading of ADRs. In the present study we assessed agreement between the two widely used causality assessment scales, that is, the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Center (WHO-UMC) criteria and the Naranjo algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The same observer assessed all ADRs (n = 913) collected between January 2010 and December 2012 using the WHO-UMC criteria and Naranjo algorithm at a tertiary care hospital in India. We found that the most frequently assigned causality category was "possible" with both the scales. RESULTS: A disagreement in the causality assessment was found in 45 (4.9\%) cases reflecting "poor" agreement between the two scales (Kappa statistic with 95\% confidence interval = 0.143 [0.018, 0.268]). The mean time taken to assess causality of the ADR using the WHO-UMC criteria was shorter than that by the Naranjo algorithm. CONCLUSION: This study showed that there is a poor agreement between the WHO-UMC criteria and Naranjo algorithm with the former being less time-consuming.
This article was published in Indian J Pharmacol and referenced in Brain Disorders & Therapy

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version