Psychostimulant prescribing trends in a paediatric population in Ireland: a national cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychotropic paediatric prescribing trends are increasing internationally. The aim of this study is to examine the prevalence and secular trends in psychotropic prescribing in Irish children and adolescents between 2002 and 2011. METHODS: Data was obtained from the Irish General Medical Services (GMS) scheme pharmacy claims database from the Health Service Executive Primary Care Reimbursement Services (HSE-PCRS). Prescribing rates per 1000 eligible population and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated across years (2002-2011), age groups (0-4, 5-11, 12-15 years) and gender. Rates of concomitant prescriptions for psycholeptics and antidepressants were also examined. The total expenditure costs were calculated and expressed as a percentage of the cost of all prescriptions for this age group (≤ 15 years). RESULTS: In 2002, 3.77/1000 GMS population (95% CI: 3.53-4.01) received at least one psychostimulant prescription and this rate increased to 8.63/1000 GMS population (95% CI: 8.34-8.92) in 2011. Methylphenidate was the most frequently prescribed psychostimulant. For both males and females the prevalence of medication use was highest among the 12-15 year old group. On average, a psycholeptic medication was prescribed to 8% of all psychostimulant users and an antidepressant was concomitantly prescribed on average to 2%. Total expenditure rose from €89,254 in 2002 to €1,532,016 in 2011. CONCLUSIONS: The rate and cost of psychostimulant prescribing among GMS children and adolescents in Ireland increased significantly between 2002 and 2011. Further research is necessary to assess the safety, efficacy and economic impact of concomitant psychotropic prescribing in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".