Evolution of Cross-Sectional Survey Protocol Quality Over Time: A Case Series of Index U.S. REMS Knowledge Survey Protocols (2007–2020)
Introduction Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United States. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the scientific rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols submitted to FDA and com...
Saved in:
Published in | Drug safety Vol. 46; no. 11; pp. 1073 - 1087 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Cham
Springer International Publishing
01.11.2023
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Introduction
Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United States.
Objective
The aim of this study was to assess the scientific rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols submitted to FDA and compare protocols before and after FDA’s 2012 public workshop and 2019 draft guidance.
Method
A content analysis of index survey protocols submitted to FDA (2007–2020) for single-product REMS with elements to assure safe use (39 programs, 78 protocols) was conducted. Each protocol was scored against 52 core essential elements (CEE), abstracted from FDA’s guidance and grouped into six domains: study objective (
n
= 5), study design (
n
= 18), survey instrument (
n
= 9), participant recruitment (
n
= 7), survey administration (
n
= 9), and statistical analysis plan (
n
= 4). Scores were collected by time periods: (A) Oct 2007 to Jul 2012; (B) Aug 2012 to Feb 2019; (C) Mar 2019 to Dec 2020; and compared using logistic generalized linear mixed models adjusting for domain, survey population, vendor, program, and protocol.
Results
There were 30 (38.5%), 40 (51.3%), and 8 (10.3%) protocols submitted in time period A, B, and C, respectively. Adjusted marginal means of elements present (on the probability scale) by time period were 0.5816 (SE = 0.0242), 0.6429 (SE = 0.0229), and 0.7543 (SE = 0.0394). The likelihood of missing a CEE declined over time (adjusted
p
-value = 0.0094, time period A vs C). The statistical analysis plan domain had the most improvement; study design remained the weakest domain with the scientific justification CEE particularly underrepresented.
Conclusion
The rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols improved over time consistent with FDA’s efforts to advance regulatory science, but gaps remain. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Introduction
Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United States.
Objective
The aim of this study was to assess the scientific rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols submitted to FDA and compare protocols before and after FDA’s 2012 public workshop and 2019 draft guidance.
Method
A content analysis of index survey protocols submitted to FDA (2007–2020) for single-product REMS with elements to assure safe use (39 programs, 78 protocols) was conducted. Each protocol was scored against 52 core essential elements (CEE), abstracted from FDA’s guidance and grouped into six domains: study objective (
n
= 5), study design (
n
= 18), survey instrument (
n
= 9), participant recruitment (
n
= 7), survey administration (
n
= 9), and statistical analysis plan (
n
= 4). Scores were collected by time periods: (A) Oct 2007 to Jul 2012; (B) Aug 2012 to Feb 2019; (C) Mar 2019 to Dec 2020; and compared using logistic generalized linear mixed models adjusting for domain, survey population, vendor, program, and protocol.
Results
There were 30 (38.5%), 40 (51.3%), and 8 (10.3%) protocols submitted in time period A, B, and C, respectively. Adjusted marginal means of elements present (on the probability scale) by time period were 0.5816 (SE = 0.0242), 0.6429 (SE = 0.0229), and 0.7543 (SE = 0.0394). The likelihood of missing a CEE declined over time (adjusted
p
-value = 0.0094, time period A vs C). The statistical analysis plan domain had the most improvement; study design remained the weakest domain with the scientific justification CEE particularly underrepresented.
Conclusion
The rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols improved over time consistent with FDA’s efforts to advance regulatory science, but gaps remain. Introduction Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United States. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the scientific rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols submitted to FDA and compare protocols before and after FDA's 2012 public workshop and 2019 draftguidance. Method A content analysis of index survey protocols submitted to FDA (2007-2020) for single-product REMS with elements to assure safe use (39 programs, 78 protocols) was conducted. Each protocol was scored against 52 core essential elements (CEE), abstracted from FDA's guidance and grouped into six domains: study objective (n = 5), study design (n = 18), survey instrument (n = 9), participant recruitment (n = 7), survey administration (n = 9), and statistical analysis plan (n = 4). Scores were collected by time periods: (A) Oct 2007 to Jul 2012; (B) Aug 2012 to Feb 2019; (C) Mar 2019 to Dec 2020; and compared using logistic generalized linear mixed models adjusting for domain, survey population, vendor, program, and protocol. Results There were 30 (38.5%), 40 (51.3%), and 8 (10.3%) protocols submitted in time period A, B, and C, respectively. Adjusted marginal means of elements present (on the probability scale) by time period were 0.5816 (SE = 0.0242), 0.6429 (SE = 0.0229), and 0.7543 (SE = 0.0394). The likelihood of missing a CEE declined over time (adjusted p-value = 0.0094, time period A vs C). The statistical analysis plan domain had the most improvement; study design remained the weakest domain with the scientific justification CEE particularly underrepresented. Conclusion The rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols improved over time consistent with FDA's efforts to advance regulatory science, but gaps remain. Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United States. The aim of this study was to assess the scientific rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols submitted to FDA and compare protocols before and after FDA's 2012 public workshop and 2019 draft guidance. A content analysis of index survey protocols submitted to FDA (2007-2020) for single-product REMS with elements to assure safe use (39 programs, 78 protocols) was conducted. Each protocol was scored against 52 core essential elements (CEE), abstracted from FDA's guidance and grouped into six domains: study objective (n = 5), study design (n = 18), survey instrument (n = 9), participant recruitment (n = 7), survey administration (n = 9), and statistical analysis plan (n = 4). Scores were collected by time periods: (A) Oct 2007 to Jul 2012; (B) Aug 2012 to Feb 2019; (C) Mar 2019 to Dec 2020; and compared using logistic generalized linear mixed models adjusting for domain, survey population, vendor, program, and protocol. There were 30 (38.5%), 40 (51.3%), and 8 (10.3%) protocols submitted in time period A, B, and C, respectively. Adjusted marginal means of elements present (on the probability scale) by time period were 0.5816 (SE = 0.0242), 0.6429 (SE = 0.0229), and 0.7543 (SE = 0.0394). The likelihood of missing a CEE declined over time (adjusted p-value = 0.0094, time period A vs C). The statistical analysis plan domain had the most improvement; study design remained the weakest domain with the scientific justification CEE particularly underrepresented. The rigor of REMS knowledge survey protocols improved over time consistent with FDA's efforts to advance regulatory science, but gaps remain. |
Author | Turk, Philip Toyserkani, Gita A. Quick, Janifer Morrato, Elaine H. Ewusie, Samuel B. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Gita A. orcidid: 0000-0002-6946-6138 surname: Toyserkani fullname: Toyserkani, Gita A. email: Gita.Toyserkani@fda.hhs.gov organization: Food and Drug Administration – sequence: 2 givenname: Samuel B. surname: Ewusie fullname: Ewusie, Samuel B. organization: Food and Drug Administration, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) Program – sequence: 3 givenname: Philip orcidid: 0000-0001-5717-0439 surname: Turk fullname: Turk, Philip organization: University of Mississippi Medical Center – sequence: 4 givenname: Janifer surname: Quick fullname: Quick, Janifer organization: Food and Drug Administration, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) Program – sequence: 5 givenname: Elaine H. orcidid: 0000-0001-6105-7826 surname: Morrato fullname: Morrato, Elaine H. organization: Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health, Loyola University Chicago |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37697204$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9kUFv1DAQhS3Uim4Lf4ADssQFDl7GjuMk3KrVQiuKCqQ9W44zqVJl49ZOlt0bV878w_4SnG4rpB56Gmn0vaeZ9w7JXu96JOQNhzkHyD4GCUJJBiJhwBMp2eYFmXGeFYwXUuyRGXAuWVpwdUAOQ7gGgFyo_CU5SDJVZALkjPxZrl03Dq3rqWvowrsQWIl2WpiOlqNf45Z-925w1nX0x2i6dtjS8zV6etGu8BM9pgsTkJboWwyTx2lf44Zezss5_bn8VtKvvfvVYX2FT90CfS_iG3e__woQ8OEV2W9MF_D1wzwil5-XF4sTdnb-5XRxfMZskqUDa0zeJCqtBfLUZkpZKWMYtoIGpIW8rpE3mc1kqiqOVZViipJX0lquQJk6SY7Iu53vjXe3I4ZBX7vRx2-DFnkRD8qKVEXq7QM1Vius9Y1vV8Zv9WNyEch3gJ0y89ho2w5mym3wpu00Bz2VpHcl6ViSvi9Jb6JUPJE-uj8rSnaiEOH-Cv3_s59R_QNS4qOs |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1007_s40264_025_01533_w |
Cites_doi | 10.3758/s13428-015-0617-9 10.1186/s12913-021-06808-3 10.1176/appi.ps.201500181 10.1007/s40264-016-0501-2 10.1002/pds.3400 10.1002/pds.5119 10.2217/cer-2020-0147 10.1007/s40801-015-0042-5 10.1017/cts.2019.400 10.1002/pds.4373 10.2217/cer-2020-0253 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4401 10.2147/PPA.S286935 10.7275/svg4-e671 10.1002/9781394260645 10.1016/B978-0-08-102295-5.10805-4 10.31486/toj.19.0087 10.56759/iiew8982 10.1002/pds.3450 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023. corrected publication 2023 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply. Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Nov 2023 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023. corrected publication 2023 – notice: 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply. – notice: Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Nov 2023 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 4T- 7RV 7T2 7TK 7U7 7X7 7XB 88E 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA BENPR C1K CCPQU FYUFA GHDGH K9. KB0 M0S M1P NAPCQ PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI |
DOI | 10.1007/s40264-023-01344-x |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Docstoc Nursing & Allied Health Database Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive) Neurosciences Abstracts Toxicology Abstracts Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management ProQuest One Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Health & Medical Collection Medical Database Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management ProQuest Central Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) Health & Medical Research Collection Health & Safety Science Abstracts ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) Toxicology Abstracts ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) Neurosciences Abstracts ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition Docstoc ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) |
DatabaseTitleList | ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: BENPR name: ProQuest Central url: https://www.proquest.com/central sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine Public Health Pharmacy, Therapeutics, & Pharmacology Statistics |
EISSN | 1179-1942 |
EndPage | 1087 |
ExternalDocumentID | 37697204 10_1007_s40264_023_01344_x |
Genre | Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S Journal Article |
GeographicLocations | United States United States--US |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United States – name: United States--US |
GroupedDBID | --- -EM 04C 0R~ 199 29G 2JY 36B 3V. 4.4 406 53G 5GY 5RE 6I2 6PF 7RV 7X7 88E 8FI 8FJ 8R4 8R5 95. AAAUJ AACDK AADNT AAIAL AAIKX AAJKR AAKAS AANZL AARHV AASML AATNV AAWTL AAYOK AAYQN AAYTO AAYZH ABAKF ABDZT ABFTV ABIPD ABJNI ABJOX ABKCH ABKMS ABKTR ABLLE ABMNI ABOCM ABPLI ABTKH ABTMW ABUWG ABWHX ABXPI ACAOD ACCOQ ACCUX ACDTI ACGFO ACGFS ACMJI ACMLO ACOKC ACPIV ACPRK ACREN ACZOJ ADBBV ADFRT ADFZG ADJJI ADQRH ADRFC ADURQ ADYOE ADZCM ADZKW AEBTG AEFQL AEJHL AEJRE AEMSY AENEX AEOHA AEPYU AESKC AEVLU AEXYK AEYRQ AFBBN AFKRA AFRAH AFWTZ AFZKB AGAYW AGDGC AGQEE AGQMX AGRTI AHIZS AHMBA AHSBF AIAKS AIGIU AILAN AIZAD AJRNO ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMXSW AMYLF ASPBG AVWKF AWSVR AXYYD AZFZN A~4 BENPR BGNMA BKEYQ BPHCQ BVXVI BYPQX CAG CCPQU COF CS3 DCUDU DNIVK DPUIP DU5 EBLON EBS EJD EMOBN ESX EX3 F5P FERAY FIGPU FLLZZ FNLPD FSGXE FYUFA HMCUK IAO IHR IMOTQ INH INR ITC IWAJR J-C J5H JZLTJ L7B LGEZI LLZTM LOTEE M1P M4Y NADUK NAPCQ NQJWS NU0 NXXTH O9- OAC OPC OVD P2P PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO Q2X ROL RSV RZALA SISQX SJYHP SNPRN SNX SOHCF SOJ SPKJE SRMVM SSLCW TEORI TSG U9L UAX UG4 UKHRP UTJUX VDBLX VFIZW W48 WAF WOW YFH YQY Z0Y ZGI ZXP ~JE AAYXX ABBRH ABDBE ABFSG ACMFV ACSTC AEZWR AFDZB AFHIU AFOHR AHWEU AIXLP ATHPR AYFIA CITATION PHGZM PHGZT CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 4T- 7T2 7TK 7U7 7XB 8FK ABRTQ C1K K9. PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQUKI |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-fa8f365d2e15c766c44100cb0f04c08dde1f7c7456b1ebb5e5e41b4cc1606ad33 |
IEDL.DBID | 7X7 |
ISSN | 0114-5916 |
IngestDate | Sat Jul 26 00:37:06 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:34:48 EST 2025 Tue Jul 01 00:37:57 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 22:52:25 EDT 2025 Fri Feb 21 02:43:52 EST 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 11 |
Language | English |
License | 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c375t-fa8f365d2e15c766c44100cb0f04c08dde1f7c7456b1ebb5e5e41b4cc1606ad33 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-6105-7826 0000-0002-6946-6138 0000-0001-5717-0439 |
PMID | 37697204 |
PQID | 2890077956 |
PQPubID | 32187 |
PageCount | 15 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_journals_2890077956 pubmed_primary_37697204 crossref_citationtrail_10_1007_s40264_023_01344_x crossref_primary_10_1007_s40264_023_01344_x springer_journals_10_1007_s40264_023_01344_x |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 20231100 2023-11-00 20231101 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2023-11-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 11 year: 2023 text: 20231100 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Cham |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Cham – name: New Zealand – name: Auckland |
PublicationSubtitle | The Official Journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance [ISoP] |
PublicationTitle | Drug safety |
PublicationTitleAbbrev | Drug Saf |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Drug Saf |
PublicationYear | 2023 |
Publisher | Springer International Publishing Springer Nature B.V |
Publisher_xml | – name: Springer International Publishing – name: Springer Nature B.V |
References | BraselKHaiderAHaukoosJPractical guide to survey researchJAMA Surg2020155435110.1001/jamasurg.2019.440131995149 United States Food and Drug Administration, “FDA’s Role in Managing Medication Risks,” 2018. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategies-rems/fdas-role-managing-medication-risks. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. KalkbrennerMA practical guide to instrument development and score validation in the social sciences: the MEASURE approachPract Assess Res Eval202110.7275/svg4-e671 AmendKLAssessment of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for VARENICLINE (Chantix): a multistage patient surveyPharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf20182732532621:CAS:528:DC%2BC1cXkt12rtr0%3D10.1002/pds.437329405516 AdayLACorneliusLJDesigning and conducting health surveys : a comprehensive guide20063HoobokenJohn Wiley & Sons Inc. Quality Improvement Organization Review, 42 CFR Part 476.1 (2023). [Online]. Available: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/chapter-IV/subchapter-F/part-476. Accessed 03 July 2023. European Medicines Agency,” Guidance for the format and content of the protocol of non-interventional post-authorization safety studies. Sep. 2012 [Online]. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjck6PNn4eAAxWOD1kFHSC5ArwQFnoECCQQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ema.europa.eu%2Fen%2Fdocuments%2Fother%2Fguidance-format-content-protocol-non-interventional-post-authorisation-safety-studies_en.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1D2I9lkqvc2CK5UYLXM7dL&opi=89978449. Accessed 03 July 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “Format and Content of a REMS Document Guidance for Industry,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/77846/download. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “Use of a Drug Master File for Shared System REMS Submissions Guidance for Industry,” 2017. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/109124/download. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration., “Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Assessments: Social Science Methodologies to Assess Goals Related to Knowledge; Public Workshop; Issue Paper,” 2012. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/05/03/2012-10646/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategy-assessments-social-science-methodologies-to-assess-goals. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. Heads of Medicine Agencies and European Medicines Agency Science Medicines Health, “Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP): Module XVI – Risk minimisation measures: selection of tools and 5 effectiveness indicators (Rev 3),” Feb. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory-procedural-guideline/guideline-good-pharmacovigilance-practices-gvp-module-xvi-risk-minimisation-measures-selection-tools_en.pdf. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “Advancing Regulatory Science at FDA: FOCUS AREAS OF REGULATORY SCIENCE (FARS),” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/161381/download#:~:text=we%20identified%20priorities%20in%20women’s,%2C%20rare%20diseases%2C%20and%20oncology. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. EspositoDBPatient knowledge of safe use of ER/LA opioid analgesics following implementation of the class-wide REMS: a survey studyPatient Prefer Adherence20211543144210.2147/PPA.S286935336587677917306 United States Food and Drug Administration, “What We Do,” 2018. https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/what-we-do#missionhttps://www.fda.gov/about-fda. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. IshiharaLBeckMTravisSAkintayoOBrickelNPhysician and pharmacist understanding of the risk of urinary retention with retigabine (Ezogabine): a REMS assessment surveyDrugs Real World Outcomes20152433534410.1007/s40801-015-0042-5266905434674522 BrandenburgNABwireRFreemanJHounFSheehanPZeldisJBEffectiveness of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for lenalidomide and thalidomide: patient comprehension and knowledge retentionDrug Saf201740433334110.1007/s40264-016-0501-2280744235362654 United States Food and Drug Administration, “Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies | REMS,” 2021. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategies-rems. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “PDUFA REAUTHORIZATION PERFORMANCE GOALS AND PROCEDURES FISCAL YEARS 2023 THROUGH 2027,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/151712/download. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “Evaluating the Effect of the Opioid Analgesics Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Education Program on Prescribing Behaviors and Patient Outcomes-Exploring the Path Forward for Assessment; Public Workshop; Issues Paper; Request for Comments,” Federal Register, Nov. 05, 2020. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/05/2020-24542/evaluating-the-effect-of-the-opioid-analgesics-risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategy-education. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, “Content Analysis,” Jan. 10, 2023. https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/population-health-methods/content-analysis Accessed 01 Feb 2023. SalasMA qualitative evaluation of patient and healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes, and behavior for safety and use of pexidartinibJ Comp Eff Res202110318719210.2217/cer-2020-014733474977 United States Food and Drug Administration, “Development of a Shared System REMS Guidance for Industry,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/113869/download. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. Dillman D, Hox J, Leeuw E. International handbook of survey methodology. European Association of Methodology 2008. ToussiMIsabelleBTcherny-LessenotSVoogdHDimosVKaplanSEffectiveness of risk minimisation measures for valproate: a cross-sectional survey among physicians in EuropePharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf202130328329110.1002/pds.511933216434 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Subchapter V-Drugs and Devices Part A-Drugs and Devices. United States, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28title:21%20section:355-1%20edition:prelim%29%20OR%20%28granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section355-1%29&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true#sourcecredit. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. National Institutes of Health, “Clinical Trial E-Protocol Tool and Template Documents,” 2017. https://osp.od.nih.gov/policies/clinical-research#tab1. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. United States Food and Drug Administration, “REMS Assessment: Planning and Reporting Guidance for Industry,” 2019. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/119790/download United States Food and Drug Administration, “Identification of Drug and Biological Products Deemed to Have Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies for Purposes of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007,” Mar. 2008.. [Online]. Available: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/03/27/E8-6201/identification-of-drug-and-biological-products-deemed-to-have-risk-evaluation-and-mitigation. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. Johnson TP. Handbook of health survey methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2014. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: 978-1-118-00232-2. Baxter J. Content analysis. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. 2020;391–396. SalasMEvaluation of patient/caregiver and healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes and behavior for safety and use of pexidartinibJ Comp Eff Res2021101295396710.2217/cer-2020-025334187183 United States Department of Health and Human Services, “Chart01: Is an Activity Human Subjects Research Covered by 45 CFR Part 46?” [Online]. Available: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/decision-charts-2018/index.html#c1. Accessed 03 July 2023. HuynhLToyserkaniGAMorratoEHPragmatic applications of implementation science frameworks to regulatory science: an assessment of FDA Risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) (2014–2018)BMC Health Serv Res202121177910.1186/s12913-021-06808-3343623678348874 United States Food and Drug Administration, “REMS: FDA’s Application of Statutory Factors in Determining When a REMS Is Necessary,” Apr. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/100307/download. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. PontoJUnderstanding and evaluating survey researchJ Adv Pract Oncol201562168171266492504601897 BrewerSECampagnaEJMorratoEHAdvancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: a mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey responseJ Clin Transl Sci20193419920910.1017/cts.2019.400316602446799639 CIOMS Working Group report, “Patient involvement in the development, regulation and safe use of medicines,” Geneva, Switzerland, 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.56759/iiew8982 BassMaloyPJWHow to determine if a project is human subjects research, a quality improvement project, or bothOchsner J2020201566110.31486/toj.19.0087 EngerCYounusMPetronisKRMoJGatelyRSeegerJDThe effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a REMS assessment surveyPharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf20132277057151:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhtVKiu7jF10.1002/pds.340023349095 HaysRDLiuHKapteynAUse of Internet panels to conduct surveysBehav Res Methods201547368569010.3758/s13428-015-0617-9261700524546874 United States Food and Drug Administration, “Administrative Practices and Procedures; Good Guidance Practices,” Feb. 2000.. [Online]. Available: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/02/14/00-3344/administrative-practices-and-procedures-good-guidance-practices. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. MorratoEHGlucose testing for adults receiving medicaid and antipsychotics: a population-based prescriber survey on behaviors, attitudes, and barriersPsychiatr Serv201667779880210.1176/appi.ps.201500181270326574939591 DillmanDSmythJChristianLInternet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method2014HobokenJohn Wiley & Sons Inc Dal PanGJCommentary on ‘The effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a rems assessment survey’ by Enger et L Huynh (1344_CR6) 2021; 21 M Toussi (1344_CR40) 2021; 30 R Groves (1344_CR20) 2009 GJ Dal Pan (1344_CR16) 2013; 22 M Kalkbrenner (1344_CR48) 2021 PJW BassMaloy (1344_CR44) 2020; 20 1344_CR25 1344_CR24 1344_CR23 1344_CR21 J Ponto (1344_CR12) 2015; 6 L Ishihara (1344_CR18) 2015; 2 1344_CR8 M Salas (1344_CR38) 2021; 10 DB Esposito (1344_CR36) 2021; 15 1344_CR4 1344_CR5 1344_CR7 NA Brandenburg (1344_CR15) 2017; 40 1344_CR1 1344_CR2 1344_CR3 1344_CR29 SE Brewer (1344_CR13) 2019; 3 1344_CR28 1344_CR27 1344_CR26 1344_CR35 1344_CR34 1344_CR33 1344_CR32 1344_CR31 1344_CR30 RD Hays (1344_CR19) 2015; 47 LA Aday (1344_CR9) 2006 C Enger (1344_CR17) 2013; 22 D Dillman (1344_CR22) 2014 M Salas (1344_CR39) 2021; 10 EH Morrato (1344_CR10) 2016; 67 KL Amend (1344_CR14) 2018; 27 1344_CR37 1344_CR47 K Brasel (1344_CR11) 2020; 155 1344_CR46 1344_CR45 1344_CR43 1344_CR42 1344_CR41 1344_CR49 |
References_xml | – reference: AmendKLAssessment of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for VARENICLINE (Chantix): a multistage patient surveyPharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf20182732532621:CAS:528:DC%2BC1cXkt12rtr0%3D10.1002/pds.437329405516 – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Evaluating the Effect of the Opioid Analgesics Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Education Program on Prescribing Behaviors and Patient Outcomes-Exploring the Path Forward for Assessment; Public Workshop; Issues Paper; Request for Comments,” Federal Register, Nov. 05, 2020. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/05/2020-24542/evaluating-the-effect-of-the-opioid-analgesics-risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategy-education. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “What We Do,” 2018. https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/what-we-do#missionhttps://www.fda.gov/about-fda. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, “Content Analysis,” Jan. 10, 2023. https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/population-health-methods/content-analysis Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: IshiharaLBeckMTravisSAkintayoOBrickelNPhysician and pharmacist understanding of the risk of urinary retention with retigabine (Ezogabine): a REMS assessment surveyDrugs Real World Outcomes20152433534410.1007/s40801-015-0042-5266905434674522 – reference: European Medicines Agency,” Guidance for the format and content of the protocol of non-interventional post-authorization safety studies. Sep. 2012 [Online]. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjck6PNn4eAAxWOD1kFHSC5ArwQFnoECCQQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ema.europa.eu%2Fen%2Fdocuments%2Fother%2Fguidance-format-content-protocol-non-interventional-post-authorisation-safety-studies_en.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1D2I9lkqvc2CK5UYLXM7dL&opi=89978449. Accessed 03 July 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “REMS Assessment: Planning and Reporting Guidance for Industry,” 2019. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/119790/download – reference: United States Department of Health and Human Services. “2018 Requirements (2018 Common Rule).” [Online]. Available: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/revised-common-rule-regulatory-text/index.html. Accessed 03 July 2023. – reference: BraselKHaiderAHaukoosJPractical guide to survey researchJAMA Surg2020155435110.1001/jamasurg.2019.440131995149 – reference: GrovesRSurvey methodology20092HobokenJohn Wiley & Sons Inc – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Development of a Shared System REMS Guidance for Industry,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/113869/download. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. – reference: BassMaloyPJWHow to determine if a project is human subjects research, a quality improvement project, or bothOchsner J2020201566110.31486/toj.19.0087 – reference: PontoJUnderstanding and evaluating survey researchJ Adv Pract Oncol201562168171266492504601897 – reference: Baxter J. Content analysis. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. 2020;391–396. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration., “Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Assessments: Social Science Methodologies to Assess Goals Related to Knowledge; Public Workshop; Issue Paper,” 2012. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/05/03/2012-10646/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategy-assessments-social-science-methodologies-to-assess-goals. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Survey Methodologies to Assess REMS Goals That Relate to Knowledge: Guidance for Industry,” 2019.. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/119789/download. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: BrewerSECampagnaEJMorratoEHAdvancing regulatory science and assessment of FDA REMS programs: a mixed-methods evaluation examining physician survey responseJ Clin Transl Sci20193419920910.1017/cts.2019.400316602446799639 – reference: Dal PanGJCommentary on ‘The effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a rems assessment survey’ by Enger et alPharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf20132277167181:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhtVKiu7nO10.1002/pds.3450 – reference: SalasMEvaluation of patient/caregiver and healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes and behavior for safety and use of pexidartinibJ Comp Eff Res2021101295396710.2217/cer-2020-025334187183 – reference: Heads of Medicine Agencies and European Medicines Agency Science Medicines Health, “Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP): Module XVI – Risk minimisation measures: selection of tools and 5 effectiveness indicators (Rev 3),” Feb. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory-procedural-guideline/guideline-good-pharmacovigilance-practices-gvp-module-xvi-risk-minimisation-measures-selection-tools_en.pdf. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Advancing Regulatory Science at FDA: FOCUS AREAS OF REGULATORY SCIENCE (FARS),” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/161381/download#:~:text=we%20identified%20priorities%20in%20women’s,%2C%20rare%20diseases%2C%20and%20oncology. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: ToussiMIsabelleBTcherny-LessenotSVoogdHDimosVKaplanSEffectiveness of risk minimisation measures for valproate: a cross-sectional survey among physicians in EuropePharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf202130328329110.1002/pds.511933216434 – reference: EspositoDBPatient knowledge of safe use of ER/LA opioid analgesics following implementation of the class-wide REMS: a survey studyPatient Prefer Adherence20211543144210.2147/PPA.S286935336587677917306 – reference: HaysRDLiuHKapteynAUse of Internet panels to conduct surveysBehav Res Methods201547368569010.3758/s13428-015-0617-9261700524546874 – reference: Johnson TP. Handbook of health survey methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2014. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: 978-1-118-00232-2. – reference: CIOMS Working Group report, “Patient involvement in the development, regulation and safe use of medicines,” Geneva, Switzerland, 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.56759/iiew8982 – reference: HuynhLToyserkaniGAMorratoEHPragmatic applications of implementation science frameworks to regulatory science: an assessment of FDA Risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) (2014–2018)BMC Health Serv Res202121177910.1186/s12913-021-06808-3343623678348874 – reference: SalasMA qualitative evaluation of patient and healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes, and behavior for safety and use of pexidartinibJ Comp Eff Res202110318719210.2217/cer-2020-014733474977 – reference: EngerCYounusMPetronisKRMoJGatelyRSeegerJDThe effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a REMS assessment surveyPharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf20132277057151:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhtVKiu7jF10.1002/pds.340023349095 – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Use of a Drug Master File for Shared System REMS Submissions Guidance for Industry,” 2017. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/109124/download. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: DillmanDSmythJChristianLInternet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method2014HobokenJohn Wiley & Sons Inc – reference: National Institutes of Health, “Clinical Trial E-Protocol Tool and Template Documents,” 2017. https://osp.od.nih.gov/policies/clinical-research#tab1. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Public Dashboard,” 2023. https://fis.fda.gov/sense/app/ca606d81-3f9b-4480-9e47-8a8649da6470/sheet/dfa2f0ce-4940-40ff-8d90-d01c19ca9c4d/state/analysis?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: Dillman D, Hox J, Leeuw E. International handbook of survey methodology. European Association of Methodology 2008. – reference: KalkbrennerMA practical guide to instrument development and score validation in the social sciences: the MEASURE approachPract Assess Res Eval202110.7275/svg4-e671 – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Administrative Practices and Procedures; Good Guidance Practices,” Feb. 2000.. [Online]. Available: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/02/14/00-3344/administrative-practices-and-procedures-good-guidance-practices. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “REMS: FDA’s Application of Statutory Factors in Determining When a REMS Is Necessary,” Apr. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/100307/download. Accessed: Feb. 01, 2023. – reference: Quality Improvement Organization Review, 42 CFR Part 476.1 (2023). [Online]. Available: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/chapter-IV/subchapter-F/part-476. Accessed 03 July 2023. – reference: MorratoEHGlucose testing for adults receiving medicaid and antipsychotics: a population-based prescriber survey on behaviors, attitudes, and barriersPsychiatr Serv201667779880210.1176/appi.ps.201500181270326574939591 – reference: BrandenburgNABwireRFreemanJHounFSheehanPZeldisJBEffectiveness of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for lenalidomide and thalidomide: patient comprehension and knowledge retentionDrug Saf201740433334110.1007/s40264-016-0501-2280744235362654 – reference: Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Subchapter V-Drugs and Devices Part A-Drugs and Devices. United States, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=%28title:21%20section:355-1%20edition:prelim%29%20OR%20%28granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section355-1%29&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true#sourcecredit. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “PDUFA REAUTHORIZATION PERFORMANCE GOALS AND PROCEDURES FISCAL YEARS 2023 THROUGH 2027,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/151712/download. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies | REMS,” 2021. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategies-rems. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Format and Content of a REMS Document Guidance for Industry,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.fda.gov/media/77846/download. Accessed: 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “Identification of Drug and Biological Products Deemed to Have Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies for Purposes of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007,” Mar. 2008.. [Online]. Available: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/03/27/E8-6201/identification-of-drug-and-biological-products-deemed-to-have-risk-evaluation-and-mitigation. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – reference: United States Department of Health and Human Services, “Chart01: Is an Activity Human Subjects Research Covered by 45 CFR Part 46?” [Online]. Available: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/decision-charts-2018/index.html#c1. Accessed 03 July 2023. – reference: AdayLACorneliusLJDesigning and conducting health surveys : a comprehensive guide20063HoobokenJohn Wiley & Sons Inc. – reference: National Institutes of Health, “Protocol Templates for Clinical Trials.” [Online.] https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/protocol-template.htm. Accessed 03 July 2023. – reference: United States Food and Drug Administration, “FDA’s Role in Managing Medication Risks,” 2018. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/risk-evaluation-and-mitigation-strategies-rems/fdas-role-managing-medication-risks. Accessed 01 Feb 2023. – ident: 1344_CR32 – volume: 47 start-page: 685 issue: 3 year: 2015 ident: 1344_CR19 publication-title: Behav Res Methods doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0617-9 – volume: 21 start-page: 779 issue: 1 year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR6 publication-title: BMC Health Serv Res doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06808-3 – ident: 1344_CR42 – ident: 1344_CR4 – volume: 6 start-page: 168 issue: 2 year: 2015 ident: 1344_CR12 publication-title: J Adv Pract Oncol – ident: 1344_CR23 – volume: 67 start-page: 798 issue: 7 year: 2016 ident: 1344_CR10 publication-title: Psychiatr Serv doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201500181 – ident: 1344_CR8 – volume: 40 start-page: 333 issue: 4 year: 2017 ident: 1344_CR15 publication-title: Drug Saf doi: 10.1007/s40264-016-0501-2 – volume: 22 start-page: 705 issue: 7 year: 2013 ident: 1344_CR17 publication-title: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf doi: 10.1002/pds.3400 – ident: 1344_CR46 – volume: 30 start-page: 283 issue: 3 year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR40 publication-title: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf doi: 10.1002/pds.5119 – ident: 1344_CR31 – volume: 10 start-page: 187 issue: 3 year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR39 publication-title: J Comp Eff Res doi: 10.2217/cer-2020-0147 – ident: 1344_CR29 – volume: 2 start-page: 335 issue: 4 year: 2015 ident: 1344_CR18 publication-title: Drugs Real World Outcomes doi: 10.1007/s40801-015-0042-5 – volume: 3 start-page: 199 issue: 4 year: 2019 ident: 1344_CR13 publication-title: J Clin Transl Sci doi: 10.1017/cts.2019.400 – volume: 27 start-page: 253 issue: 3 year: 2018 ident: 1344_CR14 publication-title: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf doi: 10.1002/pds.4373 – ident: 1344_CR35 – ident: 1344_CR5 – ident: 1344_CR45 – volume: 10 start-page: 953 issue: 12 year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR38 publication-title: J Comp Eff Res doi: 10.2217/cer-2020-0253 – ident: 1344_CR49 – volume: 155 start-page: 351 issue: 4 year: 2020 ident: 1344_CR11 publication-title: JAMA Surg doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.4401 – ident: 1344_CR24 – ident: 1344_CR1 – ident: 1344_CR28 – volume: 15 start-page: 431 year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR36 publication-title: Patient Prefer Adherence doi: 10.2147/PPA.S286935 – volume-title: Survey methodology year: 2009 ident: 1344_CR20 – year: 2021 ident: 1344_CR48 publication-title: Pract Assess Res Eval doi: 10.7275/svg4-e671 – ident: 1344_CR34 – volume-title: Designing and conducting health surveys : a comprehensive guide year: 2006 ident: 1344_CR9 – ident: 1344_CR30 – volume-title: Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method year: 2014 ident: 1344_CR22 doi: 10.1002/9781394260645 – ident: 1344_CR2 – ident: 1344_CR27 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-102295-5.10805-4 – ident: 1344_CR21 – ident: 1344_CR25 – volume: 20 start-page: 56 issue: 1 year: 2020 ident: 1344_CR44 publication-title: Ochsner J doi: 10.31486/toj.19.0087 – ident: 1344_CR33 – ident: 1344_CR41 doi: 10.56759/iiew8982 – ident: 1344_CR37 – ident: 1344_CR3 – volume: 22 start-page: 716 issue: 7 year: 2013 ident: 1344_CR16 publication-title: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf doi: 10.1002/pds.3450 – ident: 1344_CR43 – ident: 1344_CR7 – ident: 1344_CR26 – ident: 1344_CR47 |
SSID | ssj0008268 |
Score | 2.410255 |
Snippet | Introduction
Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the... Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the United... Introduction Surveys are commonly used to assess effectiveness of FDA-required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) for drugs and biologics in the... |
SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref springer |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 1073 |
SubjectTerms | Content analysis Cross-Sectional Studies Drug Safety and Pharmacovigilance FDA approval Human subjects Humans Knowledge Medicine Medicine & Public Health Original Research Article Performance evaluation Pharmaceutical Preparations Pharmacology/Toxicology Pharmacovigilance Polls & surveys Prescription drugs Product safety Risk assessment Risk Assessment - methods Science Stakeholders Statistical analysis Statistical models Statistics Surveys United States United States Food and Drug Administration |
Title | Evolution of Cross-Sectional Survey Protocol Quality Over Time: A Case Series of Index U.S. REMS Knowledge Survey Protocols (2007–2020) |
URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40264-023-01344-x https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37697204 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2890077956 |
Volume | 46 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9NAEB5Be6mEKgivlFLNAVUgssWPXa_TCypRqgJqsOpGys2yN-tTFbdxWjU3rpz5h_ySzviRCCp6syXvrqWZnflmducbgHeZqwzZRk_0lZcJGVgrwpyfQk-HmePmXlrdthgFJ2P5baImTcKtbK5VtjaxMtTTwnCO_BMfiDlaE5z_fHkluGsUn642LTQewyZTl_GVLj1ZBVzk3apSOMb8QhEOaopmuHQuprgpkII8FgXTvpTi9m_HdA9t3jsprRzQ8VPYbpAjHtWifgaP7KwD-1FNPb3s4fm6kqrs4T5Ga1LqZQee1Pk5rMuOOrDFKLMmaX4Ov4Y3jQZikeOA_0_E1R0tXjG-nt_YJUbzYlHQdFjTbizxB-0C5BKSQzzCAXlD5FSbLXmOr0zCiOOD-ADPhqcxfm9Td__OVuJ7zmP--fnbI0j54QWMj4fngxPR9GgQxtdqIfI0zP1ATT1LQtdBYAheOY7JnNyRxgnJeLq5NppgWubaLFNWWelm0hiXIqd06vsvYWNWzOxrwFCmqp_bVBnfp6C9n3puanLtyDRIPW1kF9xWQIlpCMy5j8ZFsqJeroSakFCTSqjJbRc-rsZc1vQdD36928o9abZymawVrwuval1YTUXWuc9dfrrQa5VjPfD_6-w8vM4b2OKm9nXF4y5sLObX9i1Bn0W2V-n3Hmx-GY6iM3obRad3J5r_bg |
linkProvider | ProQuest |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9NAEB5V6YFKCEF4NFBgDlCByBZ7vesHEkIlpEpIG6I6kXoz9mZ9QnGJ09LcuHLmf_Cj-CXM-pEIKnrrzQfvQ5rZmW9md74BeJbYUpFt5CyQPGHC1Zr5qfnyuecnlp3yuHhtMXR7E_HxRJ5swK-6FsY8q6xtYmGop5kyOfLX5kLM8jyC8-9OvzLTNcrcrtYtNEq1GOjlNwrZ8rf9DyTf55wfdMedHqu6CjDleHLB0thPHVdOuaZteq6rCBBYlkqs1BLK8um426mnPAIWia2TRGqphZ0IpWzC-vHUJEDJ5G8Kh0KZBmy-7w5HxyvbT2C9sP0UZTBJyKsq0zHFeiFFaq5g5CMpfHeEYBd_u8JL-PbS3Wzh8g5uw60Kq-J-qVx3YEPPmrA7Ksmul20cr2u38jbu4mhNg71sws0yI4hloVMTtgyuLWmh78KP7nml85il2DH7Y2HxKsysGJ7Nz_USR_NskdF0WBJ9LPETnTs0RStvcB875H_RJPd0buboG9pHnOyFe3jcPQpxUCcL_50txxcmc_r7-09OIPblPZhci_zuQ2OWzfQ2oC9iGaQ6lspxhBsEMbdjlXqWiN2Ye0q0wK4FFKmKMt107vgSrcieC6FGJNSoEGp00YJXqzGnJWHIlX_v1HKPKuORR2tVb8GDUhdWU5E_CExfoRa0a-VYD_z_Og-vXucp3OiNjw6jw_5w8Ai2uFHSot5yBxqL-Zl-TMBrkTyptB3h83UfsD8x4jvM |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9NAEB5VRUKVEILwChTYA1Qgsq293vXaSAhVaaKGQIlII-Vm7M36hOISp6W-ceXMv-Hn8EuY8SMRVPTWmw_ehzSvb2bnAfAscZVB3Sh4qETCpW8tD1L6CoQOEsdNRVxmWxz5hxP5bqqmG_CrqYWhtMpGJ5aKepYZipHv0YOYozXC-b20TosYHfTfnnzlNEGKXlqbcRoViwxt8Q3dt_zN4ABp_VyIfu-4e8jrCQPceFoteRoHqeermbB4Ze37BsGB45jESR1pnABF30210QgyEtcmibLKSjeRxriI--MZBUNR_V_TnnJJxvR05eyhZS3L8Mjf4AoxWF2wQ2V7Y_TZfMnRWqIj70nJz_82iheQ7oVX2tL49W_BzRq1sv2KzW7Dhp23YGdUtb0uOux4XcWVd9gOG60bYhctuFHFBllV8tSCLUK4VYPoO_Cjd1ZzP8tS1qX78XGZH0Ynjk8XZ7Zgo0W2zHA7VrX8KNhHlEBG5Suv2T7roiVmFOazOe0xoAaQbLI73mWfeh_GbNiEDf_dLWcvKIb6-_tPgXD25V2YXAn17sHmPJvbB8ACGaswtbEynif9MIyFG5tUOzL2Y6GNbIPbECgydfN0muHxJVq1fS6JGiFRo5Ko0XkbXq3WnFStQy79e7uhe1SrkTxaM30b7le8sNoKLUNIE4ba0GmYY73w_-c8vPycp3AdxSp6PzgaPoItQTxaFl5uw-ZycWofIwJbJk9KVmfw-apl6w-efD6c |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evolution+of+Cross-Sectional+Survey+Protocol+Quality+Over+Time%3A+A+Case+Series+of+Index+U.S.+REMS+Knowledge+Survey+Protocols+%282007%E2%80%932020%29&rft.jtitle=Drug+safety&rft.au=Toyserkani%2C+Gita+A.&rft.au=Ewusie%2C+Samuel+B.&rft.au=Turk%2C+Philip&rft.au=Quick%2C+Janifer&rft.date=2023-11-01&rft.issn=0114-5916&rft.eissn=1179-1942&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1073&rft.epage=1087&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs40264-023-01344-x&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1007_s40264_023_01344_x |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0114-5916&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0114-5916&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0114-5916&client=summon |