{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0163265306122449, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.215686274509804, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A shrinkage‐based comparative assessment of observed‐to‐expected disproportionality measures

Disproportionality analysis is an important tool for interpreting spontaneous adverse event reports in pharmacovigilance. There exist a variety of disproportionality measures (DPMs) for use in safety signaling; however, it is not always clear which method is best suited for a particular need. A framework for comparing the various DPMs is necessary to fully understand the consequences of quantitative signal detection implementation decisions. Here, the mathematical relationship between these measures is explored through a comparison of the underlying equations and a shrinkage approach is adopted to further clarify these relationships.