How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?

Benedetto Vitiello*, Mark A. Riddle, Laurence L. Greenhill, John S. March, Jerome Levine, Russell J. Schachar, Howard Abikoff, Julie M. Zito, James T. McCracken, John T. Walkup, Robert L. Findling, James Robinson, Thomas B. Cooper, Mark Davies, Elena Varipatis, Michael J. Labellarte, Lawrence Scahill, Lisa Capasso

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To identify approaches to improving methods for assessing tolerability and safety of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. Method: Strengths and limitations of current methodology were reviewed and possible alternatives examined. Results: Research on the validity of safety evaluation has been extremely limited. No evidence-based "gold standard" exists. Clinical trials remain the best design to establish causality, but sample size limitations prevent the detection of infrequent, though serious, adverse events. Other designs, such as cohort and case-control studies, and approaches, such as mining of large databases, must be considered. Conclusions: The current lack of methodological standardization across studies prevents generalizations and meta-analyses. Because the issues relevant to drug safety are diverse, a variety of methodological approaches and instruments are needed. It is, however, possible to adopt standard basic definitions of adverse events, degree of severity, ascertainment methods, and recording procedures, as a common "core," to which more specific assessment instruments can be added. Systematic empirical testing and validation of safety methodology is needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)634-641
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Volume42
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003

Fingerprint

Psychopharmacology
Safety
Causality
Sample Size
Meta-Analysis
Case-Control Studies
Clinical Trials
Databases
Research
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Adverse events
  • Children
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Treatment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Vitiello, Benedetto ; Riddle, Mark A. ; Greenhill, Laurence L. ; March, John S. ; Levine, Jerome ; Schachar, Russell J. ; Abikoff, Howard ; Zito, Julie M. ; McCracken, James T. ; Walkup, John T. ; Findling, Robert L. ; Robinson, James ; Cooper, Thomas B. ; Davies, Mark ; Varipatis, Elena ; Labellarte, Michael J. ; Scahill, Lawrence ; Capasso, Lisa. / How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?. In: Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2003 ; Vol. 42, No. 6. pp. 634-641.
@article{85e44ca454b64c8eb35bae9e90261626,
title = "How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?",
abstract = "Objective: To identify approaches to improving methods for assessing tolerability and safety of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. Method: Strengths and limitations of current methodology were reviewed and possible alternatives examined. Results: Research on the validity of safety evaluation has been extremely limited. No evidence-based {"}gold standard{"} exists. Clinical trials remain the best design to establish causality, but sample size limitations prevent the detection of infrequent, though serious, adverse events. Other designs, such as cohort and case-control studies, and approaches, such as mining of large databases, must be considered. Conclusions: The current lack of methodological standardization across studies prevents generalizations and meta-analyses. Because the issues relevant to drug safety are diverse, a variety of methodological approaches and instruments are needed. It is, however, possible to adopt standard basic definitions of adverse events, degree of severity, ascertainment methods, and recording procedures, as a common {"}core,{"} to which more specific assessment instruments can be added. Systematic empirical testing and validation of safety methodology is needed.",
keywords = "Adverse events, Children, Psychopharmacology, Treatment",
author = "Benedetto Vitiello and Riddle, {Mark A.} and Greenhill, {Laurence L.} and March, {John S.} and Jerome Levine and Schachar, {Russell J.} and Howard Abikoff and Zito, {Julie M.} and McCracken, {James T.} and Walkup, {John T.} and Findling, {Robert L.} and James Robinson and Cooper, {Thomas B.} and Mark Davies and Elena Varipatis and Labellarte, {Michael J.} and Lawrence Scahill and Lisa Capasso",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/01.CHI.0000046840.90931.36",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "634--641",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry",
issn = "0890-8567",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "6",

}

Vitiello, B, Riddle, MA, Greenhill, LL, March, JS, Levine, J, Schachar, RJ, Abikoff, H, Zito, JM, McCracken, JT, Walkup, JT, Findling, RL, Robinson, J, Cooper, TB, Davies, M, Varipatis, E, Labellarte, MJ, Scahill, L & Capasso, L 2003, 'How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?', Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 634-641. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CHI.0000046840.90931.36

How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology? / Vitiello, Benedetto; Riddle, Mark A.; Greenhill, Laurence L.; March, John S.; Levine, Jerome; Schachar, Russell J.; Abikoff, Howard; Zito, Julie M.; McCracken, James T.; Walkup, John T.; Findling, Robert L.; Robinson, James; Cooper, Thomas B.; Davies, Mark; Varipatis, Elena; Labellarte, Michael J.; Scahill, Lawrence; Capasso, Lisa.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Vol. 42, No. 6, 01.01.2003, p. 634-641.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?

AU - Vitiello, Benedetto

AU - Riddle, Mark A.

AU - Greenhill, Laurence L.

AU - March, John S.

AU - Levine, Jerome

AU - Schachar, Russell J.

AU - Abikoff, Howard

AU - Zito, Julie M.

AU - McCracken, James T.

AU - Walkup, John T.

AU - Findling, Robert L.

AU - Robinson, James

AU - Cooper, Thomas B.

AU - Davies, Mark

AU - Varipatis, Elena

AU - Labellarte, Michael J.

AU - Scahill, Lawrence

AU - Capasso, Lisa

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - Objective: To identify approaches to improving methods for assessing tolerability and safety of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. Method: Strengths and limitations of current methodology were reviewed and possible alternatives examined. Results: Research on the validity of safety evaluation has been extremely limited. No evidence-based "gold standard" exists. Clinical trials remain the best design to establish causality, but sample size limitations prevent the detection of infrequent, though serious, adverse events. Other designs, such as cohort and case-control studies, and approaches, such as mining of large databases, must be considered. Conclusions: The current lack of methodological standardization across studies prevents generalizations and meta-analyses. Because the issues relevant to drug safety are diverse, a variety of methodological approaches and instruments are needed. It is, however, possible to adopt standard basic definitions of adverse events, degree of severity, ascertainment methods, and recording procedures, as a common "core," to which more specific assessment instruments can be added. Systematic empirical testing and validation of safety methodology is needed.

AB - Objective: To identify approaches to improving methods for assessing tolerability and safety of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. Method: Strengths and limitations of current methodology were reviewed and possible alternatives examined. Results: Research on the validity of safety evaluation has been extremely limited. No evidence-based "gold standard" exists. Clinical trials remain the best design to establish causality, but sample size limitations prevent the detection of infrequent, though serious, adverse events. Other designs, such as cohort and case-control studies, and approaches, such as mining of large databases, must be considered. Conclusions: The current lack of methodological standardization across studies prevents generalizations and meta-analyses. Because the issues relevant to drug safety are diverse, a variety of methodological approaches and instruments are needed. It is, however, possible to adopt standard basic definitions of adverse events, degree of severity, ascertainment methods, and recording procedures, as a common "core," to which more specific assessment instruments can be added. Systematic empirical testing and validation of safety methodology is needed.

KW - Adverse events

KW - Children

KW - Psychopharmacology

KW - Treatment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0642281437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0642281437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.CHI.0000046840.90931.36

DO - 10.1097/01.CHI.0000046840.90931.36

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 634

EP - 641

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

SN - 0890-8567

IS - 6

ER -