ArticlePediatric research2024
Grading the level of evidence of neonatal pharmacotherapy: midazolam and phenobarbital as examples.
Article in Pediatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacological therapy of neonatal analgosedation: current status, dilemmas, and perspectives.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany drugs are used off-label or unlicensed in neonates. This does not mean they are used without evidence or knowledge. We aimed to apply and evaluate the Grading and Assessment of Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Studies (GAPPS) scoring system for the level of evidence of two commonly used anti-epileptic drugs.
methodsMidazolam and phenobarbital as anti-epileptics were evaluated with a systematic literature search on neonatal pharmacokinetic (PK) and/or pharmacodynamic [PD, (amplitude-integrated) electroencephalography effect] studies. With the GAPPS system, two evaluators graded the current level of evidence. Inter-rater agreement was assessed for dosing evidence score (DES), quality of evidence (QoE), and strength of recommendation (REC).
resultsSeventy-two studies were included. DES scores 4 and 9 were most frequently used for PK, and scores 0 and 1 for PD. Inter-rater agreements on DES, QoE, and REC ranged from moderate to very good. A final REC was provided for all PK studies, but only for 25% (midazolam) and 33% (phenobarbital) of PD studies.
conclusionsThere is a reasonable level of evidence concerning midazolam and phenobarbital PK in neonates, although using a predefined target without integrated PK/PD evaluation. Further research is needed on midazolam use in term neonates with therapeutic hypothermia, and phenobarbital treatment in preterms. IMPACT: There is a reasonable level of evidence concerning pharmacotherapy of midazolam and phenobarbital in neonates. Most evidence is however based on PK studies, using a predefined target level or concentration range without integrated, combined PK/PD evaluation. Using the GAPPS system, final strength of recommendation could be provided for all PK studies, but only for 25% (midazolam) to 33% (phenobarbital) of PD studies. Due to the limited PK observations of midazolam in term neonates with therapeutic hypothermia, and of phenobarbital in preterm neonates these subgroups can be identified for further research.
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.