MHRA iDAPs explained for Yellow Card report interpretation
MHRA iDAPs show suspected side effects, not proven harm or incidence. Learn to find a medicine, read report totals and check current download limits.
MHRA iDAPs are interactive Drug Analysis Profiles showing suspected adverse reactions reported through the Yellow Card scheme. Find a medicine by active substance, but don't treat the figures as proof of harm caused by that medicine. MHRA guidance makes clear that suspicion is enough to report.
For a regulatory or pharmacovigilance review, start by checking which profile view you have opened. Different views include different report sources. The current release notes also document changes that affect comparisons with older figures.
Find a medicine in MHRA iDAPs
Use the official MHRA directory, or follow “Start now” from GOV.UK's Check drug analysis profiles service. Search by active substance or combination rather than relying on a brand name. GOV.UK says you need the active ingredient, and MHRA points readers to the patient information leaflet.
The directory offers “Search by drug name” and “Browse A–Z”. Its product-type choices are All, Medicine and Vaccine. Current profiles cover medicines and vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines as part of routine iDAP publication. See the directory and its guidance.
Check the Information tab for the profile's ingredient coverage. The release notes explain single- and multi-constituent coverage. Reports naming an individual vaccine ingredient do not necessarily appear in a grouped vaccine entry. Don't assume two differently named profiles contain the same reports, or add their totals as though their coverage cannot overlap.
Older searches often use “drug analysis prints”. The GOV.UK service URL retains that wording, while the current directory calls them interactive Drug Analysis Profiles. Use the current directory rather than treating the two names as separate current services.
Read the right profile view
The release notes distinguish three views. The difference matters before you copy a number into a safety review.
| View | What it covers |
|---|---|
| Yellow Card Overview | Suspected adverse reaction reports submitted directly by patients, the public and healthcare professionals. It excludes reports received through pharmaceutical companies. |
| Total Report Profile | Reports received through pharmaceutical companies as well as directly submitted reports. Counts reports rather than individual reactions. |
| Total Reaction Profile | Reactions recorded within reports, including reports received through pharmaceutical companies. These are not counts of unique people. |
One report can contain several reactions. MHRA's historical COVID-19 reporting summary explains the distinction between report and reaction totals. Don't sum reaction rows to calculate patient numbers.
The Total Report Profile and Total Reaction Profile have left-hand filters that change their graphs and tables. Record the filters used alongside any figure you cite. Otherwise, a colleague may open the same profile and see a different total. The filter behaviour is described in the release notes.
What the numbers cannot tell you
A listed reaction does not establish causality. MHRA's Yellow Card guidance says reporters do not have to prove that the medicine caused the suspected reaction. Keep that distinction in chart titles and written conclusions, not just a footnote.
Raw counts are not incidence rates. MHRA does not expect every suspected side effect to be reported, and report numbers depend on medicine use and reporting behaviour. Its historical vaccine reporting summary explains these limits and warns against comparing vaccine safety from relative report numbers.
More reports alone do not establish greater risk, and fewer reports do not establish that a medicine is safer. Don't turn iDAP counts into a head-to-head safety ranking or apply an assumed underreporting multiplier.
Fatal-outcome reports also need careful wording. They are not confirmed deaths caused by a product. The historical MHRA summary notes that underlying or previously undiagnosed illness may be involved. That source supports an interpretation caution, not current vaccine statistics.
Check changes before comparing older figures
An apparent change in a breakdown can reflect the system's counting rules. The current release notes describe several reasons older publications may differ.
One Primary Reporter is now assigned per report, even when several reporters are recorded. Individual reporter-category counts can therefore be lower than in earlier publications.
Year breakdowns use the date the most recent revision was received, rather than the date the report was first received. Updated reports can move between years. MHRA says it plans to realign this logic, but gives no completion date in the release notes.
Seriousness classifications use the current MHRA dictionary-serious term list. The release notes say cases may be reclassified as terms change. Don't read “serious” as a synonym for symptom intensity or “severe”. These documented changes mean a year-by-year difference alone does not establish a change in medicine risk.
Check downloads and dates before citing MHRA data
MHRA's current release notes, version 1.0.3 dated 25 August 2026, say CSV downloads are disabled while enhancements continue. No restoration date is supplied. Check those notes before planning a workflow that depends on an export.
The directory says profiles are regularly updated, with around one month between receiving a report and its appearance in a summary. That is not a fixed monthly publication schedule. The software release date is not the data cut-off.
For a reproducible reference, record the substance or profile name, selected view, filters, visible data period and access date. Treat this as a working practice, rather than an MHRA-mandated checklist. Read the essential guidance at the bottom of the profile before circulating figures, as the directory instructs.
The RegAffairs AI answer on MHRA iDAPs covers report interpretation and the limits of comparisons between medicines.