ArticleSAGE open medicine2016
Influence of health warnings on the use of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in an area of Spain: A time-series study.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Three Safety Interventions Targeting Off-Label Use of Immediate-Release Fentanyl on Prescription Trends: Interrupted Time Series Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Impact of a health alert and its implementation on flutamide prescriptions for women: an interrupted time series analysis.BMC health services research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThroughout 2007 and January 2008, several glitazones health warnings were published on rosiglitazone myocardial infarction risk. The impact of such warnings on glitazones prevalence of utilization has been extensively studied in the United States but only in one European country (England), which has showed different pattern from US studies. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of such safety warnings on glitazones utilization in an area of another European country.
methodsWe calculated the number of defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants per day of glitazones each month during the period from 2006 to 2008 in a health area of Spain. We analyzed the data graphically and through a segmented regression analysis.
resultsRosiglitazone defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants per day were growing before the safety warnings, after the warnings a change in trend occurred and rosiglitazone utilization showed a downturn slope. Pioglitazone defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants per day were stable before the safety warnings, and a linear growth was observed after the safety warnings. Throughout the study period, rosiglitazone defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants per day were higher than pioglitazone defined daily doses per thousand inhabitants per day until near the end of 2008.
conclusionDespite the fact that cardiovascular warnings affected rosiglitazone and not pioglitazone, rosiglitazone was more utilized than pioglitazone until near the end of 2008 which is a pattern similar to the one found in another European studies in England, but very different from studies in the United States, where rosiglitazone was less utilized than pioglitazone from the first month after rosiglitazone cardiovascular safety warnings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.