Prescription of methylphenidate to children and youth, 1990-1996.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: There are concerns about the frequency and appropriateness of psychostimulant drug prescription to children. In order to identify unusual or unexpected patterns of use or prescribing, we reviewed prescription of methylphenidate (Ritalin) to children and adolescents aged 19 years or less in British Columbia between 1990 and 1996. METHODS: We obtained information about patients, physicians and prescriptions from British Columbia's Triplicate Prescription Program database for controlled drugs. Prescription data were available for the period Jan. 1, 1990, to Dec. 31, 1996. Linkage with the BC Linked Health Dataset provided additional demographic and health information. RESULTS: In 1990, 1715 children received at least 1 prescription for methylphenidate (1.9 per 1000 children). By 1996, the number had increased to 10,881 children (11.0 per 1000). Because some children were prescribed methylphenidate in more than 1 year, we also calculated the frequency with which the drug was prescribed to children who had never received it before. This rate increased from 1.0 per 1000 children in 1990 to 4.7 per 1000 in 1995; the rate fell in 1996 to 3.5 per 1000. The number of children receiving methylphenidate varied across health regions of the province, from 12.0 to 35.4 per 1000. Use also varied by socioeconomic status quintile: in the 2 lowest (least privileged) quintiles, 21.6 per 1000 children received methylphenidate, compared with 18.4 per 1000 in the 3 highest quintiles (relative risk 1.2, 95% confidence interval 1.1-1.2). Pediatricians and psychiatrists wrote 23% and 21% of all prescriptions respectively. General practitioners accounted for 56% of all prescriptions and 41% of initial methylphenidate prescriptions. A claim for prior specialist consultation was found in 30% of such cases. Many of the children who received more than 10 prescriptions had seen 4 or more physicians. The average daily dosage prescribed differed little among general practitioners, pediatricians and psychiatrists, unlike the mean interval between successive prescriptions: 89.9 (standard deviation [SD] 68.2), 99.8 (SD 64.1) and 75.9 (SD 70.2) days respectively. Persistence with therapy was more likely when a psychiatrist provided the initial prescription, or with involvement of more than one specialty. INTERPRETATION: Many trends and practices in the prescription of methylphenidate to children in British Columbia are consistent with other settings and accepted standards. Some aspects warrant closer investigation, including regional and socio-economic discrepancies in the distribution of patients, the relative involvement of primary and specialist care providers, continuity of care issues and time intervals between prescriptions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».