Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Children in reviews: methodological issues in child-relevant evidence syntheses.

Kristie Cramer1, Natasha Wiebe, Virginia Moyer

  • 1Alberta Research Centre for Child Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. kcramer@ualberta.ca

BMC Pediatrics
|September 24, 2005
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Consensus definition for developmental regression during childhood.

Developmental medicine and child neurology·2026
Same author

Study protocol for a pragmatic parallel-group randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of coaching with an online intervention, compared with the online intervention alone, for families of children who have experienced developmental regression.

BMJ open·2026
Same author

From waitlists to clinical action: pathway development and research priorities in childhood developmental regression.

The Lancet. Child & adolescent health·2026
Same author

Follow-up of children born very preterm: the need for evidence-based frameworks to drive best practice and standardised care.

Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition·2026
Same author

Perinatal palliative care - how to approach antenatal counselling.

Archives of disease in childhood. Education and practice edition·2026
Same author

Prophylactic antibiotics to prevent chest infections in children with neurological impairment: the PARROT RCT.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026

Child-relevant evidence in drug intervention reviews is scarce. This study found no significant differences in drug effect sizes between children and adults, but highlights a lack of power and poor reporting in existing research.

Area of Science:

  • Pediatric Pharmacology
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Systematic Review Methodology

Background:

  • Optimal pediatric medical care relies on child-specific research.
  • Systematic reviews of drug interventions are crucial for evidence-based practice.
  • Understanding how children are represented in systematic reviews is essential.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review the inclusion of children in drug intervention reviews within the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR).
  • To compare effect sizes of drug interventions between pediatric and adult populations.
  • To identify gaps in child-relevant evidence synthesis.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic identification of child health-relevant reviews in CDSR (2002, Issue 4).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Inclusion criteria: drug interventions for conditions affecting both children and adults.
  • Data extraction focused on review characteristics, methods, results, and conclusions.

    • Main Results:

    • Out of 1496 reviews, 408 (27%) were relevant to both children and adults; 52% included pediatric data.
    • No significant differences in drug effect sizes were found between children and adults.
    • Comparisons lacked statistical power, and inadequate reporting hindered data availability.

    Conclusions:

    • A significant lack of child-specific evidence exists in systematic reviews of drug interventions.
    • Improved reporting standards for participant populations in drug intervention studies are needed.
    • Further research is required to ensure robust evidence for pediatric drug efficacy and safety.