From paediatric formulations development to access: Advances made and remaining challenges
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developing suitable paediatric formulations and ensuring access to them by the greatest number of the 2.2 billion children worldwide are equally important to provide optimal pharmacotherapy. This review focuses on the progress made over the last two decades with paediatric oral formulations with respect to evidence for acceptability and dosing flexibility of liquid and solid oral dosage forms. It also discusses the clinical needs for, and the access to, paediatric formulations for existing authorised medicines. A significant body of new knowledge now supports the acceptability of solid oral dosage forms in children, resulting in an increasing number of medicines commercialised as multiparticulates, including minitablets that are starting to be brought to market. However, there are gaps with these formulations that deserve more research. Even though efforts have been made to identify medicines in need of age-appropriate formulations, there is no common priority list shared internationally. Such prioritisation would help to develop paediatric formulations with the greatest potential for providing a health benefit to children worldwide. In addition, available data highlight that paediatric formulation access is fragmented and unequal, with commercialisation of suitable paediatric formulations too often limited to some countries/regions. We propose actions to better align decisions during the development of paediatric formulations and promote a more globalised approach to facilitate registration pathways between different jurisdictions. Furthermore, discussions about alignment between approval, pricing and reimbursement processes should also happen, leaving working in siloes behind us. It is time for adults to start thinking outside the box for children.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it