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
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding for this work was provided in part through contracts of the NIMH to Johns Hopkins University (N01MH60016; Principal Investigator: Mark A. Riddle, M.D.) and the Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene (N01MH60005; Principal Investigator: Laurence L. Greenhill, M.D.) for the Research Units on Pediatric Psychopharmacology research network.
PY - 2003/6
Y1 - 2003/6
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
C2 - 12921470
AN - SCOPUS:0642281437
SN - 0890-8567
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
IS - 6
ER -