ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2024
Public health relevance of medicines developed under paediatric legislation in Europe and the USA: a systematic mapping study.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLegislation in the European Union (EU) and the USA promoting the development of paediatric medicines has contributed to new treatments for children. This study explores how such legislation responds to paediatric health needs in different country settings and globally, and whether it should be considered for wider implementation.
methodsWe searched EU and US regulatory databases for medicines with approved indications resulting from completed paediatric development between 2007 and 2018. Of 195 medicines identified, 187 could be systematically mapped to the burden of the target disease for six study countries (Australia, Brazil, Canada, Kenya, Russia, South Africa) and globally, using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). All medicines were also screened for inclusion on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) and the EML for children under 13 years (EMLc).
resultsThe studied medicines were disproportionately focused on non-communicable diseases, which represented 68% of medicines and 21% of global paediatric DALYs. On the other hand, we found 28% of medicines for communicable, maternal, neonatal and nutritional disorders, representing 73% of global paediatric DALYs. Neonatal disorders and malaria were mapped with two medicines, tuberculosis and neglected tropical diseases with none. The gap between medicines and paediatric DALYs was greater in countries with lower income. Still, 34% of medicines are included in the EMLc and 48% in the EML.
conclusionsPaediatric policies in the EU and the USA are only partially responsive to paediatric health needs. To be considered for wider implementation, paediatric incentives and obligations should be more targeted towards paediatric health needs. International harmonisation of legislation and alignment with global research priorities could further strengthen its impact on child health and support ongoing efforts to improve access to medicines. Furthermore, efforts should be made to ensure global access to authorised paediatric medicines.
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.