Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33212847›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutics2020

I Spy with My Little Eye: A Paediatric Visual Preferences Survey of 3D Printed Tablets.

Patricija Januskaite, Xiaoyan Xu, Sejal R Ranmal, Simon Gaisford, Abdul W Basit, Catherine Tuleu, Alvaro Goyanes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Patricija JanuskaiteDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5717-6400
Xiaoyan XuDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2218-6278
Sejal R RanmalDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6972-3694
Simon GaisfordDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1000-3208
Abdul W BasitDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5368-6603
Catherine TuleuDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8384-357X
Alvaro GoyanesDepartment of Pharmaceutics, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, 29-39 Brunswick Square, London WC1N 1AX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3378-6797

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/S023054/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

3D printing (3DP) in the pharmaceutical field is a disruptive technology that allows the preparation of personalised medicines at the point of dispensing. The paediatric population presents a variety of pharmaceutical formulation challenges such as dose flexibility, patient compliance, taste masking and the fear or difficulty to swallow tablets, all factors that could be overcome using the adaptable nature of 3DP. User acceptability studies of 3D printed formulations have been previously carried out in adults; however, feedback from children themselves is essential in establishing the quality target product profile towards the development of age-appropriate medicines. The aim of this study was to investigate the preference of children for different 3D printed tablets (Printlets™) as an important precursor to patient acceptability studies. Four different 3DP technologies; digital light processing (DLP), selective laser sintering (SLS), semi-solid extrusion (SSE) and fused deposition modeling (FDM) were used to prepare placebo printlets with similar physical attributes including size and shape. A single-site, two-part survey was completed with participants aged 4-11 years to determine their preference and opinions based on visual inspection of the printlets. A total of 368 participants completed an individual open questionnaire to visually select the best and worst printlet, and 310 participants completed further non-compulsory open questions to elaborate on their choices. Overall, the DLP printlets were the most visually appealing to the children (61.7%) followed by the SLS printlets (21.2%), and with both the FDM (5.4%) and SSE (11.7%) printlets receiving the lowest scores. However, after being informed that the SSE printlets were chewable, the majority of participants changed their selection and favoured this printlet, despite their original choice, in line with children's preference towards chewable dosage forms. Participant age and sex displayed no significant differences in printlet selection. Printlet descriptions were grouped into four distinct categories; appearance, perceived taste, texture and familiarity, and were found to be equally important when creating a quality target product profile for paediatric 3D printed formulations. This study is the first to investigate children's perceptions of printlets, and the findings aim to provide guidance for further development of paediatric-appropriate medicines using different 3DP technologies.

Indexed as

3D printed drug productsadditive manufacturingMEDIMAKER 3D printing technologypediatricspersonalized pharmaceuticalsprinting formulations and dosage formsprintletsthree-dimensional printingvisual preference

Identifiers

PMID33212847
PMCPMC7698452

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.