Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;329:7-8 (3 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7456.7
We need pragmatic ways of using the best available information
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
As prescribers, we all aspire towards the goal of providing safe and effective medicines for our patients. At the bedside, we are routinely confronted with the challenge of determining which treatment (if any) offers the most appropriate tradeoff between benefit and harm. In ideal circumstances, we would base this assessment on the findings of a systematic review. But the reality is that systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials tend to focus on efficacy and seldom pay much attention to adverse effects.1 2 In contrast, product datasheets and drug reference texts (such as the British National Formulary) are laden with comprehensive lists of adverse effects. Is there really any need to look beyond these ubiquitous, easily accessible sources of safety data?
However, all is not what it seems. Lists of adverse effects can be extremely lengthyfor example, Bracchi noted 54 adverse effects for fluoxetineand incorporating them into a useful analysis of
Yoon Kong Loke, senior lecturer in clinical pharmacology
School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ (y.loke@uea.ac.uk)
Read all Rapid Responses