ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Clinical phenotypes and early treatment escalation in pediatric acute drug-induced dystonia: A tertiary emergency department cohort study.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To characterize the clinical phenotypes and pharmacological profile of pediatric acute drug-induced dystonia (DID) and to evaluate whether initial treatment escalation in complex presentations reduces the need for repeat antidystonic dosing. In this retrospective cohort study, 132 children diagnosed with acute DID in a tertiary pediatric emergency department were analyzed. Causative agents were categorized by pharmacological mechanism, identifying potent dopamine D2 receptor antagonists (metoclopramide and antipsychotics). Presentations were classified as pure dystonia or complex phenotypes (dystonia with additional systemic/neurologic features). Firth's penalized logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to assess predictors of repeat antidystonic treatment (≥ 2 doses). The median age was 13.7 years (IQR 10.1-16.4). Potent D2 antagonists accounted for 73.5% of cases. Pure dystonia was observed in 78.0%, and 22.0% had complex phenotypes. Initial combination therapy was more frequent in complex cases (10.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.010). Repeat dosing was required in 8.3%. No independent predictors were identified; however, exposure to potent D2 antagonists showed a non-significant association with repeat treatment (OR 4.01; 95% CI 0.47-33.95), an estimate of the study was underpowered to confirm. Despite greater initial severity, complex phenotypes did not have higher repeat dosing rates.
conclusionPediatric DID in this cohort predominantly affected adolescents and was driven by potent D2 antagonist exposure. Complex presentations more often received initial combination therapy yet did not show higher repeat-dosing rates; whether this reflects effective early escalation or simply that complex phenotypes are not inherently more refractory cannot be determined from this design and warrants prospective study. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Acute drug-induced dystonia is a frequent pediatric emergency adverse event, most often triggered by antiemetics and antipsychotics. • Management relies on anticholinergic monotherapy; prior studies mainly describe epidemiology rather than predictors of short-term treatment course. WHAT IS NEW: • The affected population was predominantly adolescent (median 13.7 years), and potent D2-blocking agents showed a non-significant association with higher repeat dosing (OR 4.01) that the study was underpowered to confirm. • Complex phenotypes were more likely to receive initial combination therapy (p = 0.010), yet repeat dosing rates were not higher than in pure dystonia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42423837What 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.