Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21732178›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2012

The status of paediatric medicines initiatives around the world--What has happened and what has not?

Kalle Hoppu, Gabriel Anabwani, Facundo Garcia-Bournissen, Madlen Gazarian, Gregory L Kearns, Hidefumi Nakamura, Robert G Peterson, Shalini Sri Ranganathan, Saskia N de Wildt

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Pediatric melanoma-The whole (conflicts of interest) story.International journal of women's dermatology · 2019
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Public drug policy for children in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Off-label and unlicensed medicines to hospitalised children in Norway.The Journal of pharmacy and pharmacology · 2017
    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

9 authors.

Kalle HoppuHospital for Children and Adolescents and Dept. of Clinical Pharmacology, University of Helsinki and Poison Information Centre, Helsinki University Central Hospital, P.O. Box 790, 00029, Helsinki, Finland. kaarlo.hoppu@hus.fi
Gabriel Anabwani
Facundo Garcia-Bournissen
Madlen Gazarian
Gregory L Kearns
Hidefumi Nakamura
Robert G Peterson
Shalini Sri Ranganathan
Saskia N de Wildt

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis review was conducted to examine the current status of paediatric medicines initiatives across the globe.

methodsThe authors made a non-systematic descriptive review of current world situation.

resultsTwo regions, the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), and the World Health Organization (WHO) have introduced strong paediatric initiatives to improve children's health through improving access to better paediatric medicines. The experience from the US initiative indicates that it is possible to stimulate development and study of paediatric medicines and provide important new information for improvement of paediatric therapy. The early results from the EU initiative are similarly encouraging. In Canada, Japan, Australia and other developed countries, specific paediatric medicines initiatives have been less extensive and weaker, with modest results. Disappointingly, current evidence suggests that results from clinical trials outside the US often do not benefit children in the country in which the trials were largely conducted. Pharmaceutical companies that have derived a financial benefit commensurate with the cost of doing the paediatric trials in one country do not seem to be making the results of these trials available to all countries if there is no financial incentive to the company. The WHO campaign 'make medicines child size' has produced substantive accomplishments in building improved foundations to improve mechanisms that will enhance children's access to critical medicines in resource-limited settings. However, practically all of this work has been performed using an amalgamation of short-term funding from a variety of sources as opposed to a sustained, programmatic commitment.

conclusionsAlthough much still needs to be done, it's clear that with concerted efforts and appropriate resources, change is possible but slow. Retaining and fostering public and political interest in paediatric medicines is challenging, but pivotal for success.

Indexed as

Child WelfareDrug TherapyGlobal HealthHealth PolicyBiomedical ResearchCapacity BuildingChildDrugs, InvestigationalHealth Care ReformHealth PromotionHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfantLegislation, DrugPharmaceutical ServicesResearch Support as TopicDrugs, Investigational

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.