ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Incorporating patient-reported outcome measures into routine paediatric pharmacovigilance: opportunities for safety monitoring with practical use scenarios from paediatric oncology.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traditional pharmacovigilance systems often fail to capture children's experiences of adverse events (AEs), particularly subjective symptoms that affect daily functioning and quality of life. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) offer a complementary perspective by enabling direct input from children or their caregivers on treatment-related outcomes. Objectives: To examine how PROMs can be integrated into routine paediatric pharmacovigilance and to propose practical use scenarios that illustrate their potential applications. Methods: We conducted a targeted narrative review using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, and Web of Science, complemented by manual searches of regulatory guidance and reference lists. Studies were included if they addressed the use of PROMs in paediatric contexts relevant to pharmacovigilance. Extracted data were synthesised across domains, including measurement properties, regulatory uptake, and potential for safety monitoring. The search was carried out in June 2025. Results: PROMs have demonstrated strong validity, feasibility, and relevance for detecting symptomatic AEs and monitoring health-related quality of life in paediatric populations. Instruments such as PROMIS Paediatric and other condition-specific tools have been successfully used across clinical, regulatory, and research settings. PROMs enhance the detection and characterisation of AEs by capturing dimensions not readily assessed through traditional spontaneous reporting. Building on these findings, we present five practical use scenarios that exemplify how the Ped-PRO-CTCAE can be adapted for real-world safety monitoring in pharmacovigilance workflows, including spontaneous reporting, EHR-based monitoring, pharmacy-based follow-up, and medication rechallenge. Conclusion: PROMs offer a structured, patient-centred approach to paediatric pharmacovigilance, enhancing post-marketing safety monitoring through systematic symptom reporting.
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.