Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26822371›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2016

Psychotropic drug use among 0-17 year olds during 2004-2014: a nationwide prescription database study.

Ingeborg Hartz, Svetlana Skurtveit, Anne Kjersti Myhrene Steffenak, Øystein Karlstad, Marte Handal

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.8field-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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ingeborg HartzFaculty of Public Health, Hedmark University College, Elverum, Norway. ingeborg.hartz@hihm.no.
Svetlana SkurtveitDivision of Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. svetlana.skurtveit@fhi.no.
Anne Kjersti Myhrene SteffenakFaculty of Public Health, Hedmark University College, Elverum, Norway. anne.myhrene@hihm.no.
Øystein KarlstadDivision of Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. oystein.karlstad@fhi.no.
Marte HandalDivision of Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. marte.handal@fhi.no.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NOInland Norway University of Applied Sciences · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTime-trend studies on psychotropic drugs among children and adolescents are scarce, and most of them are outdated. The purpose of this study was to study prevalences of psychotropic drug use during 2004-2014 among Norwegians aged <18 years, overall and in psychotropic sub-groups.

methodsData were obtained from the Norwegian Prescription Database, which covers all dispensed prescription drugs in Norway from 2004 and onwards. Psychotropic drugs included: antipsychotics (ATC-group N05A), anxiolytics (N05B), hypnotic/sedatives (N05C), antidepressants (N06A), stimulants (N06BA), and alimemazine (R06AD01). Period (1-year) prevalence of use, overall and in subgroups of psychotropic drugs, was estimated by identifying individuals <18 years who had at least one psychotropic drug dispensed during each year.

resultsPsychotropic drug use increased in 0-17 year olds over an 11-year period, in which the main contributing drugs were stimulants (boys overall; 15.0 to 20.8/1000, girls overall; 3.8 to 8.5/1000), hypnotic/sedative drugs in adolescents (boys overall; 4.2 to 10.8/1000, girls overall; 2.6 to 8.8/1000) and to some extent antidepressants among adolescent girls (girls overall from 3.1 to 4.0/1000). Psychotropic drug use was, however, reduced by half in the youngest children, attributed to reduction of alimemazine only (1-year olds: boys; from 36.6 to 10.2/1000, girls; 26.9 to 7.2/1000). A higher level of psychotropic drug use was observed among younger boys, but there is a shift towards girls using more psychotropic drugs than boys during adolescence for all psychotropic drugs except for stimulants.

conclusionDifferent trends in psychotropic drug use exist in age and gender subgroups. Psychotropic drug use has decreased among the youngest children, attributed to alimemazine, and increased in older children and adolescents, attributed mainly to stimulants and hypnotics/sedatives.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualAdolescentAnti-Anxiety AgentsAntidepressive AgentsAntipsychotic AgentsCentral Nervous System StimulantsChildFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesInfantMaleNorwayPractice Patterns, Physicians'PrevalencePsychotropic DrugsAnti-Anxiety AgentsAntidepressive AgentsAntipsychotic AgentsCentral Nervous System StimulantsHypnotics and SedativesPsychotropic Drugs

Identifiers

PMID26822371
PMCPMC4731947
OpenAlexW2263937208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.