UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Validation of a transparent decision model to rate drug interactions


Far, Elmira; Curkovic, Ivanka; Byrne, Kelly; Roos, Malgorzata; Egloff, Isabelle; Dietrich, Michael; Kirch, Wilhelm; Kullak-Ublick, Gerd A; Egbring, Marco (2012). Validation of a transparent decision model to rate drug interactions. BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology, 13:7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiple databases provide ratings of drug-drug interactions. The ratings are often based on different criteria and lack background information on the decision making process. User acceptance of rating systems could be improved by providing a transparent decision path for each category. METHODS: We rated 200 randomly selected potential drug-drug interactions by a transparent decision model developed by our team. The cases were generated from ward round observations and physicians' queries from an outpatient setting. We compared our ratings to those assigned by a senior clinical pharmacologist and by a standard interaction database, and thus validated the model. RESULTS: The decision model rated consistently with the standard database and the pharmacologist in 94 and 156 cases, respectively. In two cases the model decision required correction. Following removal of systematic model construction differences, the DM was fully consistent with other rating systems. CONCLUSION: The decision model reproducibly rates interactions and elucidates systematic differences. We propose to supply validated decision paths alongside the interaction rating to improve comprehensibility and to enable physicians to interpret the ratings in a clinical context.

BACKGROUND: Multiple databases provide ratings of drug-drug interactions. The ratings are often based on different criteria and lack background information on the decision making process. User acceptance of rating systems could be improved by providing a transparent decision path for each category. METHODS: We rated 200 randomly selected potential drug-drug interactions by a transparent decision model developed by our team. The cases were generated from ward round observations and physicians' queries from an outpatient setting. We compared our ratings to those assigned by a senior clinical pharmacologist and by a standard interaction database, and thus validated the model. RESULTS: The decision model rated consistently with the standard database and the pharmacologist in 94 and 156 cases, respectively. In two cases the model decision required correction. Following removal of systematic model construction differences, the DM was fully consistent with other rating systems. CONCLUSION: The decision model reproducibly rates interactions and elucidates systematic differences. We propose to supply validated decision paths alongside the interaction rating to improve comprehensibility and to enable physicians to interpret the ratings in a clinical context.

Citations

2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

58 downloads since deposited on 07 Mar 2013
8 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2012
Deposited On:07 Mar 2013 10:09
Last Modified:17 Nov 2016 14:25
Publisher:BioMed Central
ISSN:2050-6511
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/2050-6511-13-7
PubMed ID:22950884
Permanent URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-75418

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 723kB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations