Forum Update: Supporting Community-Led Discussion
The forum was created as a space for shared learning and peer support, and as the community grows, we want to lean more fully into that purpose.
Going forward, PAAB will be taking a more listening-first role in forum discussions. Rather than responding immediately to every question, we’ll be encouraging members to engage with one another, share experiences, and help build collective understanding. PAAB will continue to monitor conversations and will step in to:
- Correct any misunderstandings
- Provide guidance when questions remain unanswered after a few days
- Support discussions where official clarification is needed
Our goal is to foster a collaborative, trusted community where knowledge is shared and strengthened by everyone’s contributions.
Thank you for being part of the conversation.
206 - Under what circumstances would it be acceptable to claim that two arms of a clinical trial have similar side effect profiles? Does it only relate to the type of most commonly reported adverse drug reactions in each arm or must the incidence also be comparable?
-
Broad comparative claims relating to side effect profile are only considered when they appear explicitly in the Product Monograph. When based on a study, a safety comparison would be subject to all PAAB code requirements (including limitation to specific adverse events defined a priori with corresponding statistical analysis).
