SynthesisDrug design, development and therapy2019
Efficacy of chloral hydrate oral solution for sedation in pediatrics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Drug design, development and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drugs for Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Drugs in R&D · 2025Pooled it
- Midazolam for sedation before procedures in adults and children: a systematic review update.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of dexmedetomidine with chloral hydrate as sedatives for pediatric patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Single-Agent Sedation for Behavioral Management in Pediatric Dentistry: An Umbrella Review of Agents, Routes of Administration, Providers, and Clinical Settings.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparative efficacy and post-discharge adverse events of intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with different oral medications for procedural sedation in children: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Chloral Hydrate's Impact on Brain Development: From Clinical Safety to Molecular Mechanisms.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Quality of Systematic Reviews on Pediatric Sedation in Dentistry: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A Survey on Procedural Sedation and Analgesia for Pediatric Facial Laceration Repair in Korea.Archives of plastic surgery · 2023Article
- Intranasal Dexmedetomidine Compared to a Combination of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine with Ketamine for Sedation of Children Requiring Dental Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChloral hydrate (CH), as a sedation agent, is widely used in children for diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. However, it has not come into the market and is currently only used as hospital preparation in China. This review aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy of CH in children of all age groups for sedation before medical procedures. MATERIALS AND
methodsSeven electronic databases and three clinical trial registry platforms were searched and the deadline was September 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of CH for sedation in children were included by two reviewers. The extracted information included success rate of sedation, sedation latency and sedation duration. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was applied to assess the risk of bias. The outcomes were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software and expressed as relative risks (RR) or Mean Difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with I-squared (I
resultsA total of 24 RCTs involving 3564 children of CH for sedation were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to placebo group, CH group had a significant increase in success rate of sedation when used for painless and painful procedure (RR=4.15, 95% CI [1.21, 14.24], P=0.02; RR=1.28, 95% CI [1.17, 1.40], P<0.01), which included 22 and 455 children for this analysis, respectively. Compared to midazolam group, CH group had a significant increase in success rate of sedation (RR=1.63, 95% CI [1.48, 1.79], I
conclusionsFrom the extrapolation of the existing literature, CH oral solution is an appropriate effective alternative for sedation in pediatrics.
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.