ReviewPaediatric drugs2025
Risks and Benefits of Pharmacological Treatment for Pediatric Chronic Non-cancer Pain: When Safety Evidence Lags Behind Prescription Pads.
Review in Paediatric drugs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Changes Over 15 Years Within a Pediatric Chronic Pain Service.Paediatric & neonatal pain · 2026Article
- Adverse effects and perceived benefits of medications in children with chronic noncancer pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evidence to support the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for chronic non-cancer pain in children is limited. In practice, clinicians are often required to establish therapeutic plans using data extrapolated from adult studies, which may not apply to younger patients. Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicate minimal evidence of benefit for these treatments in children; however, the low quality of studies included in these reviews complicates the conclusions that can be derived from them. In this article, we focus on safety, an outcome as critical as efficacy in clinical trial design but often designated as secondary or even exploratory. Specifically, we examine methods for assessing adverse events in clinical research and propose a practical approach for evaluating these events in everyday practice. Additionally, we outline our strategy to conduct a risk-benefit analysis at the individual patient level, highlighting the importance of using a composite risk-benefit metric rather than assessing these outcomes separately. This approach enables real-time monitoring of both drug-related symptom relief and adverse effects, facilitating clinically meaningful risk-benefit discussions with patients and their families. Finally, we advocate for improvements in clinical trial design for pediatric chronic pain treatments, particularly around adverse events. Future trials should incorporate standardized definitions, comprehensive risk-benefit evaluations, and transparent outcome reporting. Implementing these changes may enhance decision-making by balancing the safety and the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for children and adolescents with chronic pain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40347360What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.