Agreement between WHO-UMC causality scale and the Naranjo algorithm for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions.
cross_sectional · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 34760748.
- Also identified by DOI 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_831_21 and PMC identifier 8565125.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC-SA.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The Pharmacovigilance Program of India recommends the use of the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) scale, while many clinicians prefer the Naranjo algorithm for its simplicity. In the present study, we assessed agreement between the two widely used causality assessment scales, that is, the WHO-UMC criteria and the Naranjo algorithm. In this study, 842 individual case safety reports were randomly selected from 1000 spontaneously reported forms submitted to the ADR Monitoring Center at a tertiary healthcare Institute in Central India between 2016 and 2018. Two well-trained independent groups performed the causality assessment. One group performed a causality assessment of the 842 ADRs using the WHO-UMC criteria and the other group performed the same using the Naranjo algorithm. The agreement between two ADR causality scales was assessed using the weighted kappa (κ) test. Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ) statistical test was applied between the two scales (WHO-UMC scale and Naranjo algorithm) to find out the agreement between these two scales. "No" agreement was found between the two scales {Kappa statistic with 95% confidence interval = 0.048 (<i>P</i> < 0.001)}. There was no agreement found between the WHO-UMC criteria and the Naranjo algorithm in our study.