ArticlePaediatrics & child health2003
Where physicians look for information on drug prescribing for children.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2003. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A literature review on off-label drug use in children.European journal of pediatrics · 2005Review
- Medications for Children: A Survey of Community Pharmacists.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAGArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the important role of drug therapy in children, there is often a lack of readily available information regarding the indications and dosing regimens for medications in paediatrics.
objectiveTo collect data on where family physicians obtain this prescribing information.
methodA structured questionnaire was mailed to 500 family physicians in Ontario.
resultsQuestionnaires were returned by 261 (52%) family physicians, 217 (83%) of whom identified themselves as currently involved in the care of children. Most (87%) reported that the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS) was the source that they most commonly consulted for drug information in children. The available sources of information on prescribing for children were thought to be not adequate by 40% and not readily available by 27%. Sixty-one per cent reported being moderately confident (in doubt part of the time) about their decisions regarding drug prescribing in this age group. The majority (70%) had learned most of what they know about prescribing in paediatrics during practice, while 69% and 62% reported they had little or no teaching during undergraduate and postgraduate (internship or residency) medical education, respectively.
conclusionsAlthough it is recognized that for a number of drugs used in children the CPS does not reflect the current standard of care in paediatrics, it is currently the source most commonly referred to by family physicians. Further work should be done in the provision of useful information on paediatric drug therapy to family physicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.