A Comparative View of Reported Adverse Effects of Statins in Social Media, Regulatory Data, Drug Information Databases and Systematic Reviews
Open Access
- 1 October 2020
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Drug Safety
- Vol. 44 (2), 167-179
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-020-00998-1
Abstract
Introduction There are few studies assessing how data on adverse drug events from consumers on social media compare with other sources. Aim The aim of this study was to assess the consistency of adverse event data of statin medications from social media as compared with other sources. Methods We collected data on the adverse events of statins from Twitter, the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), drug information databases (DIDs) and systematic reviews. We manually annotated 12,649 tweets collected between June 2013 and August 2018. We collected 45,447 reports from FAERS, 10,415 from MHRA, identified 17 systematic reviews with relevant data and extracted data from Facts and Comparisons® and Clinical Pharmacology®. We compared the proportion, relative frequencies and rank of each category of adverse event from each source using MedDRA® primary System Organ Class codes. Results Compared with other sources, patients on social media are proportionally far more likely to complain about musculoskeletal symptoms than other adverse events. Most adverse events showed a high level of agreement between Twitter and regulatory data. DIDs tend to demonstrate similar patterns but not as strongly. Systematic reviews tend to examine pre-specified adverse events or those reported by trial investigators. Conclusions Combining the data from multiple sources, albeit challenging, may provide a broader safety profile of any medication. Systematically collected social media reports may be able to contribute information on the most pertinent adverse effects to patients.Keywords
Funding Information
- U.S. National Library of Medicine (NIH NLM 1R01)
- Research Trainees Coordinating Centre (PDF-2014-07-041)
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- An unsupervised and customizable misspelling generator for mining noisy health-related text sourcesJournal of Biomedical Informatics, 2018
- A Survey of Adverse Event Reporting Practices Among US Healthcare ProfessionalsDrug Safety, 2016
- Systematic review on the prevalence, frequency and comparative value of adverse events data in social mediaBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2015
- Digital Drug Safety Surveillance: Monitoring Pharmaceutical Products in TwitterDrug Safety, 2014
- Online discussion of drug side effects and discontinuation among breast cancer survivorsPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 2013
- Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic reviewBMJ, 2013
- Pattern mining for extraction of mentions of Adverse Drug Reactions from user comments.2011
- Can Online Consumers Contribute to Drug Knowledge? A Mixed-Methods Comparison of Consumer-Generated and Professionally Controlled Psychotropic Medication Information on the InternetJournal of Medical Internet Research, 2011
- Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK ‘Yellow Card Scheme’: literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveysHealth Technology Assessment, 2011
- Balancing the outcomes: reporting adverse eventsThe Medical Journal of Australia, 2004