Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20297864›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2010

Adverse drug reactions in the paediatric population in Denmark: a retrospective analysis of reports made to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007.

Lise Aagaard, Camilla Blicher Weber, Ebba Holme Hansen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Adverse drug reactions in hospitalized Colombian children.Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia) · 2016
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lise AagaardDepartment of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Section for Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. laa@farma.ku.dk
Camilla Blicher Weber
Ebba Holme Hansen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe potential risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the paediatric population has become a public health concern and regulatory agencies in Europe and the US have acknowledged that there is a need for more research in this area. Spontaneous reporting systems can provide important new information about ADRs.

objectiveTo characterize ADRs in children reported in Denmark over a period of one decade.

methodsWe analysed ADRs reported to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007 for individuals aged from birth to 17 years. Data were analysed with respect to time, age and sex, category of ADR (System Organ Class [SOC]), seriousness, suspected medicines (level 2 of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical [ATC] Classification System) and type of reporter.

results2437 ADR reports corresponding to 4500 ADRs were analysed. On average, 234 ADR reports were submitted annually, corresponding to approximately two ADRs per report. From 2003 to 2005, an increasing number of ADRs submitted per report were observed, but after 2005 the reporting rate decreased. One-half of ADRs were reported for infants from birth to 2 years of age. Similar total numbers of ADRs were reported for boys and girls. The majority of ADRs reported were from the following SOCs: general disorders and administration site conditions (31%), skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (18%) and nervous system disorders (15%). Reports encompassed medicines from ATC group J: vaccines and anti-infectives for systemic use (65%); and ATC group N: nervous system (17%). On average, 42% of ADRs were classified as serious. ATC group N had the highest proportion of ADRs that were classified as serious. Although physicians reported approximately 90% of the ADRs, a relatively large proportion of serious ADRs were reported by other sources.

conclusionIn Denmark, the ADR reporting rate in the paediatric population has declined since 2005. The majority of ADRs reported in young children were reported for vaccines and anti-infectives, but also a high number of serious ADRs were reported for medicines from ATC group N. The Danish Medicines Agency should monitor prescribing patterns more tightly to identify potential risks in the paediatric population in relation to the evolving pattern of medicine use among children.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolDenmarkDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePractice Patterns, Physicians'Sex Factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.