Comparing drug effectiveness in children: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the current state of the art in pediatric comparative effectiveness research, potential gaps, and areas for improvement. METHODS: Relevant articles from inception to February 2015 were retrieved from Embase and Medline. We sequentially screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, with independent validation. Data regarding general information and study methods including statistical analysis were extracted. Study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Investigated drugs were ranked and compared with data on the prevalence of pediatric drug use. RESULTS: Three thousand nine hundred twenty-six abstracts were screened for eligibility and inclusion, and 164 articles were included in the review. Most studies were from North America (46.7%). Only 78 studies (47.6%) reported the design: 90.8% were cohort studies. Neonates were least frequently investigated. The drugs that were most often studied included systemic antibacterials (11.4%), psycholeptics (7.9%), and antiepileptics (7.6%). Adjustment for confounding was made using propensity scores in 8.5% of the studies. Studies that did not report the design were of lower quality. Many effectiveness studies were done on antineoplastic agents, which are not frequently used and few studies on analgesics and drugs for obstructive airway diseases which are frequently prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: There is ample opportunity to improve comparative effectiveness research for drugs used in pediatrics. Routinely prescribed drugs were seldom investigated. Modern methods for confounding adjustment, such as propensity scores, were rarely used.

Pharmacoepidemiological safety studies in children: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: In order to identify challenges in pediatric pharmacoepidemiological safety studies, we assessed the characteristics of such (published) studies. METHODS: Relevant articles from inception to 2013 were retrieved from Embase and Medline. We sequentially screened titles, abstracts and full texts with independent validation. We systematically collected data regarding general information, study methods and results. RESULTS: Out of 4825 unique articles, 268 full texts (5.6%) were retained; 147 (54.9%) pertained to drugs rather than vaccines. Considering the 268 studies, 202 (75.4%) concerned children and adolescents (2 to 11 years) and 14 (5.3%) included preterm newborns. Most studies originated from North America (154 [57.5%]) or Europe (92 [34.3%]). Only 47 studies (17.5%) were privately funded. The majority (174 [64.9%]) were cohort studies. Out of 268 studies, 196 (73.1%) collected data retrospectively; paper medical charts were the most common data source for the exposures (85 [31.7%]) and outcomes (122 [45.5%]). Only 3 (2.0%) drug-only studies investigated rarely used drugs. Considering all 268 studies, only 27 (10.1%) reported sample size or power calculation. Most (75 [51.0%]) drug-only studies corrected confounding by multivariate modeling unlike stratification in 66 (55.9%) vaccine-only studies. Considering 75 child-only studies without any statistically significant result, 41 (54.7%) did not discuss lack of power. CONCLUSIONS: Although the field of pediatric pharmacoepidemiology is steadily developing evaluation seldom includes neonates, is mainly focused on few drug classes and safety outcomes and concerns mainly drug use in developed countries. Small study size is a specific challenge in pediatrics. Reporting should be improved. © 2016 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.