Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42569215›Full record

ArticleThe mental health clinician2026

Foster care psychotropic prescribing regulations are complex and insufficient.

Danielle L Stutzman, Mary Accomando, Matthew Dick, Andreea Temelie, Gregory H Payne, Carol A Ott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The mental health clinician, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Danielle L Stutzman(Corresponding author) Psychiatric Pharmacist - Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Pediatric Mental Health Institute, Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, danielle.stutzman@childrenscolorado.org.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7350-4275
Mary AccomandoClinical Pharmacist - Child/Adolescent Psychiatry, Cambridge Health Alliance, Somerville, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9704-9219
Matthew DickPatient Care Pharmacist - Behavioral Health, Nationwide Children's Hospital Behavioral Health Pavilion, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2270-9018
Andreea TemelieClinical Pharmacist - Child/Adolescent Psychiatry, UPMC Western Psychiatric Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1771-4566
Gregory H PayneDirector of Strategic Initiatives, AAPP, Lincoln, Nebraska.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8592-7280
Carol A OttClinical Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Purdue University College of Pharmacy, West Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2719-3845

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Federal and state policymakers, accreditation organizations, and mental health agencies developed standards for evidence-based use of psychotropic medications among youth in foster care. Despite these efforts, foster youth are vulnerable to psychotropic polypharmacy, high dosing, and low rates of monitoring. This manuscript aimed to (1) analyze state-specific psychotropic oversight programs, and (2) examine specific state approaches and outcomes. Methods: State guidelines, including all 50 United States and Washington, DC, were identified via Google search and a Center for Health Care Strategies, Inc., 2018 technical assistance tool. For each state, authors documented whether guidelines were specific to foster care and whether they included thresholds related to polypharmacy, metabolic monitoring, age-based prescribing, maximum dosages, and any distinctive characteristics. Results: Most states (61%) have published a foster care psychotropic guideline; 9 states (18%) do not have a one, and the authors were unable to locate guidelines for the remaining 11 states (22%). More than one-third of foster care youth (38%) live in states with no psychotropic monitoring requirements. Sixty-three percent (n = 32) of states require a prior authorization (PA) or drug utilization review (DUR) for youth prescribed more than 1 psychotropic. Forty-seven states have age-based prescribing support in place, with PA (n = 28) and DUR (n = 9) being the most common oversight processes. Conclusions: States have a wide range of age restrictions, approaches to PA and DUR, and prioritization of monitoring. Some states lack guidelines entirely. Variability in state psychotropic oversight programs, reporting methods, and data collection contributes to barriers to successful optimization of psychotropic prescribing among youth in foster care.

Indexed as

child and adolescent psychiatryfoster carepsychotropic stewardship

Identifiers

PMID42569215
PMCPMC13449228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.