Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24398969›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2014

The impact of legislation on drug substances used off-label in paediatric wards--a nationwide study.

Sissel Haslund-Krog, René Mathiasen, Hanne Rolighed Christensen, Helle Holst

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sissel Haslund-KrogDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Bispebjerg Hospital, 2400, Copenhagen, Denmark.
René Mathiasen
Hanne Rolighed Christensen
Helle Holst
Bispebjerg Hospital · DKRigshospitalet · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis nationwide study is aimed at describing to what extent the European Paediatric Regulation has met therapeutic needs in children.

methodsData for each drug substance in defined daily doses (DDD) were extracted from the national Danish data base. We evaluated if drug substances were used off-label and whether they had a paediatric investigation plan (PIP). This study did not include drug prescriptions for individual paediatric patients; thus, it was not possible to make use of all off-label categories previously used. Additionally, paediatric standard assortments (SA) were compared to the European survey on paediatric medicinal products.

resultsThirteen percent of the 100 most used drug substances were determined as being used off-label, four of which had a PIP and one had a full waiver. Only one of the three drug substances used off-label most often, accounting for 85 % of such use, had a PIP. Neonates were included in one-third of PIPs and adolescents in 15. Nineteen out of 21 PIPs had a waiver and 14 PIPs were deferred. In line with the European survey, carbapenems, corticosteroids and proton pump inhibitors were frequent found in SAs.

conclusionPIPs only cover a small proportion of the drugs found to be used off-label in this study. Despite waivers granted, drug substances were used nonetheless. Unmet regulatory needs are still considerable in some therapeutic areas in neonates as well as in children.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildChild, PreschoolDrug ApprovalDrug LabelingDrug UtilizationEuropeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornOff-Label UsePediatrics

Identifiers

PMID24398969
OpenAlexW1979736620

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.