Literature DB >> 20563834

Fewer infants than older patients in paediatric randomised controlled trials.

François Angoulvant1, Florentia Kaguelidou, Stephane Dauger, Corinne Alberti.   

Abstract

To determine whether the youngest age groups are less likely to be included in paediatric randomised controlled trials (PRCTs) than older children, we conducted a PubMed search using the keyword "randomised controlled trial" and the limit "all child: 0-18 years". We retrieved 417 articles published in 2006 in 34 leading journals classified as general medical journals, paediatric medical journals, or specialist medical journals. We arbitrarily selected 144 articles, at random. For each study, we evaluated population age characteristics (central tendency, range, and dispersion), study design, sample size and topic. Of the 144 studies, only 82 were first reports of paediatric randomised controlled trials (PRCTs). Among the other studies, many were done in adults. Of the 82 PRCTs, only 11% included newborns and 26% infants; 59% included children and 39% adolescents. Using the same search strategy to retrieve PRCTs in the same journals in the last 4 months of 2009 retrieved 66 PRCTs, of which 17% included newborns, 24% infants, 61% children and 55% adolescents. The three health conditions most often reported were respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, and mental and behavioural disorders. In 34 leading journals, PRCTs were significantly less likely to include newborns and infants than older paediatric patients. Given the huge impact of PRCTs on paediatric health, additional efforts are needed to promote studies in newborns and infants, as well as studies of the impact of recent European and American regulations designed to encourage paediatric drug trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20563834     DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9480-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0393-2990            Impact factor:   8.082


  33 in total

1.  An update on the therapeutic orphan.

Authors:  J T Wilson
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 7.124

2.  Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles.

Authors:  Kirby P Lee; Marieka Schotland; Peter Bacchetti; Lisa A Bero
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-06-05       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Chloramphenicol in the newborn infant. A physiologic explanation of its toxicity when given in excessive doses.

Authors:  C F WEISS; A J GLAZKO; J K WESTON
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1960-04-21       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Randomized controlled trials and pediatric research.

Authors:  Frederick P Rivara; Duane Alexander
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2010-03

Review 5.  Pediatric clinical trial experience: government, child, parent and physician's perspective.

Authors:  Juan C Salazar
Journal:  Pediatr Infect Dis J       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.129

Review 6.  The development of drug metabolising enzymes and their influence on the susceptibility to adverse drug reactions in children.

Authors:  Trevor N Johnson
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 4.221

Review 7.  Ambulatory health care visits by children: principal diagnosis and place of visit.

Authors:  V M Freid; D M Makuc; R N Rooks
Journal:  Vital Health Stat 13       Date:  1998-05

8.  The economic impact of preschool asthma and wheeze.

Authors:  C A Stevens; D Turner; C E Kuehni; J M Couriel; M Silverman
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 16.671

9.  Children are not just small adults: the urgent need for high-quality trial evidence in children.

Authors:  Terry P Klassen; Lisa Hartling; Jonathan C Craig; Martin Offringa
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 10.  Greater response to placebo in children than in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis in drug-resistant partial epilepsy.

Authors:  Sylvain Rheims; Michel Cucherat; Alexis Arzimanoglou; Philippe Ryvlin
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  4 in total

1.  Tools for Identifying Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions for Children and Their Applicability in Clinical Practices: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Siyu Li; Liang Huang; Zhe Chen; Linan Zeng; Hailong Li; Sha Diao; Zhi-Jun Jia; Guo Cheng; Qin Yu; Lingli Zhang
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 5.988

Review 2.  How to optimize the evaluation and use of antibiotics in neonates.

Authors:  Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain; Florentia Kaguelidou; John N van den Anker
Journal:  Pediatr Clin North Am       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 3.278

Review 3.  Randomized controlled trials of antibiotics for neonatal infections: a systematic review.

Authors:  Florentia Kaguelidou; Mark A Turner; Imti Choonara; John van den Anker; John van Anker; Paolo Manzoni; Corinne Alberti; Jean-Paul Langhendries; Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  International consensus validation of the POPI tool (Pediatrics: Omission of Prescriptions and Inappropriate prescriptions) to identify inappropriate prescribing in pediatrics.

Authors:  Laily Sadozai; Shaya Sable; Enora Le Roux; Pierre Coste; Clémence Guillot; Priscilla Boizeau; Aurore Berthe-Aucejo; François Angoulvant; Mathie Lorrot; Olivier Bourdon; Sonia Prot-Labarthe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.