Cited by 178Pharmaceutical studies and practicesStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsChild and Adolescent Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

How children's responses to drugs differ from adults

Open access
Stephenson, Terence·2005·British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract

Children are not small adults. However, the main thesis of this review will be that children's responses to drugs have much in common with the responses in adults and indeed in other mammals. Often, it is assumed that drug effects differ in children but in reality this perception often arises because the drugs have not been adequately studied in paediatric populations of different ages and with different diseases. There may also be difficulties in measuring small but significant effects because the outcome measures are more difficult to assess in children. In some cases, stage of development can alter the action of, and response to, a drug – a truly age‐dependent difference in pharmacodynamics. This may be true of both the desired action and adverse events. Examples are given. Programming by drugs is also a phenomenon almost exclusive to early life, i.e. permanent effects result from a stimulus applied at a sensitive point in development (‘critical window’), often in fetal or neonatal life. Again, examples are discussed. Different pathophysiology, different disease variants, different pharmacodynamics, different ‘host’ response and different adverse drug reactions can all explain why some drugs behave differently in children. However, we need to explore ways to avoid re‐inventing the wheel by determining how data from adult animal and human models can help inform research and practice for children.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2005.02445.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. 10.1067/mcp.2000.110977 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/S0009-9236(99)70055-X · DOI
  3. 10.1016/S0091-6749(98)70158-7 · DOI
  4. 10.1056/NEJM200010123431502 · DOI
  5. 10.1096/fj.01-1045com · DOI
  6. 10.1164/ajrccm.165.7.2109096 · DOI
  7. 10.1677/joe.1.05732 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Stephenson, T.
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Stephenson, Terence
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-06
Volume
59
Issue
6
Pages
670-673
ISSN
  • 0306-5251 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2125
OpenAlex
W2114907395
Cited by
178
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child and Adolescent Health
Keywords
pediatric pharmacology, developmental programming, critical window, adverse drug reactions in children
MeSH terms
Adult, Aging, Bayes Theorem, Child, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Pharmacogenetics, Pharmacokinetics, Research Design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review