How Clinical Practice Research Datalink data are used to support pharmacovigilance.
big data
electronic health records
medical record linkage
pharmacovigilance
primary health care
Journal
Therapeutic advances in drug safety
ISSN: 2042-0986
Titre abrégé: Ther Adv Drug Saf
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101549074
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
30
11
2018
accepted:
18
04
2019
entrez:
19
6
2019
pubmed:
19
6
2019
medline:
19
6
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pharmacovigilance can be defined as the science of monitoring medicines and vaccines after license for use, the purpose of which is to quantify and characterise the safety profile of a medicine, identify previously unknown adverse reactions, inform risk-benefit assessment, and support the development of actions that can be taken to reduce risks, optimise benefits and monitor their effectiveness. This review discusses the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), which is the source of the largest research database in the UK with longitudinal, representative primary care data linked to data from other healthcare settings. CPRD supports international pharmacovigilance by providing a large, anonymised representative general population database with comprehensive capture of patient risk factors and outcomes to researchers within academic, regulatory and pharmaceutical organisations. The specific advantages of CPRD data are discussed in the context of the 'six Vs of big data' including volume, velocity, variety, veracity, validity and value. Examples of where CPRD data have been used for pharmacovigilance research and how these have fed into guidelines and policy are discussed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31210923
doi: 10.1177/2042098619854010
pii: 10.1177_2042098619854010
pmc: PMC6545638
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
2042098619854010Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: All authors are employed by the MHRA, which is an Executive Agency of the Department of Health, but have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this study. The MHRA has statutory responsibility for the pharmacovigilance of medicinal products on the UK market.
Références
Lancet. 2004 Sep 11-17;364(9438):963-9
pubmed: 15364187
BMJ. 2011 Jun 28;342:d3590
pubmed: 21712336
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012 Jan;21(1):1-10
pubmed: 22069180
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011;2011:1464-70
pubmed: 22195210
BMJ. 2014 Jul 11;349:g4219
pubmed: 25015137
Lancet. 2014 Oct 25;384(9953):1521-8
pubmed: 25037990
Int J Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;44(3):827-36
pubmed: 26050254
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Oct;80(4):910-20
pubmed: 26147850
J Biomed Inform. 2015 Dec;58:122-132
pubmed: 26432353
Curr Med Res Opin. 2016 Jun;32(6):1023-32
pubmed: 26907677
N Engl J Med. 2016 Mar 24;374(12):1145-54
pubmed: 27007958
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Jul 26;16:299
pubmed: 27456701
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 4;12(4):e0174944
pubmed: 28376093
Drug Saf. 2018 Feb;41(2):143-149
pubmed: 28840504
Drug Discov Today. 2017 Nov;22(11):1680-1685
pubmed: 28881183
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2018 Feb;27(2):239-242
pubmed: 28924986
Vaccine. 2017 Dec 14;35(49 Pt B):6885-6892
pubmed: 29056424
Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2018 Jan;9(1):5-11
pubmed: 29318002
Breast Cancer Res. 2018 Jan 19;20(1):4
pubmed: 29351761
BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 23;8(1):e019759
pubmed: 29362275
Respir Res. 2018 Apr 11;19(1):63
pubmed: 29642882
Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Aug;40(4):744-747
pubmed: 29948743
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Jun;2(6):395-403
pubmed: 30169281
BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 5;8(9):e023090
pubmed: 30185579
Eur J Epidemiol. 2019 Jan;34(1):91-99
pubmed: 30219957
Lancet. 1998 Feb 28;351(9103):637-41
pubmed: 9500320