ss-logo
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Announcement
Article
Book Review
Brief Research
Brief Research Article
Case Report
CME
CME/View Point/Book Review
COMMENTARY
Editorial
Invited Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Media & News
Mini Review
OBITUARY
Organisation News
Orginal Article
OriginaI Article
Original Aeticle
Original Article
Original Article 1
Original Article 2
Original Article 3
Original Article 4
Original Research
Other
Perspective
Report
Review Article
SHORT ARTICLE
Short Communication
Special Article
Technology Review
View Point
ss-logo
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Announcement
Article
Book Review
Brief Research
Brief Research Article
Case Report
CME
CME/View Point/Book Review
COMMENTARY
Editorial
Invited Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Media & News
Mini Review
OBITUARY
Organisation News
Orginal Article
OriginaI Article
Original Aeticle
Original Article
Original Article 1
Original Article 2
Original Article 3
Original Article 4
Original Research
Other
Perspective
Report
Review Article
SHORT ARTICLE
Short Communication
Special Article
Technology Review
View Point
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Review Article
2026
:14;
7
doi:
10.25259/JCH_13_2025

Pediatric Clinical Trials: Addressing Challenges, Implementing Solutions, and Future Directions

,
1Department of Clinical Operations, Krescent Medical Research Pvt. Ltd., Pune, Maharashtra, India.

*Corresponding author: Dr. Krishnaa S. Upadhye, Department of Clinical Operations, Krescent Medical Research Pvt. Ltd., Pune, Maharashtra, India. krishnaa.upadhye@krescentmr.com

Received: , Accepted: ,
© 2026 Published by Scientific Scholar on behalf of Journal of Comprehensive Health
Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Upadhye KS, Tayade P. Pediatric Clinical Trials: Addressing Challenges, Implementing Solutions, and Future Directions. J Compr Health. 2026;14:7 doi: 10.25259/JCH_13_2025

Abstract

Pediatric clinical trials are vital for ensuring safe and effective treatments for children, yet they face unique challenges distinct from adult trials. These include ethical and regulatory complexities, age-specific protocol design, small sample sizes, and logistical hurdles in recruitment and retention. Innovative strategies such as adaptive and Bayesian trial designs, pediatric research networks, and active caregiver engagement are helping to address these barriers. Emerging technologies such as digital health tools, electronic health records, real-world evidence, and artificial intelligence/machine learning are transforming trial conduct. Case studies demonstrate how these advancements can overcome traditional obstacles. Moving forward, pediatric research will benefit from stronger stakeholder collaboration, the integration of personalized medicine, and the use of genomics to improve outcomes. This review explores current challenges, practical solutions, and future directions in pediatric clinical trials, advocating for a dynamic research ecosystem tailored to children’s needs.

Keywords

Adaptive designs
Digital health
Ethical considerations
Pediatric clinical trials
Pediatric pharmacokinetics

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric clinical trials are essential for evaluating the safety and efficacy of medical interventions in children, who differ significantly from adults in their physiological and developmental profiles.1,2 These differences necessitate age-specific research to optimize therapeutic outcomes and minimize adverse effects.

However, conducting pediatric trials involves distinct challenges not commonly encountered in adult studies.3 Ethical complexities arise from the dual requirement of parental consent and child assent.4 Recruitment is often hindered by parental concerns about safety, while logistical issues such as the need for child-friendly protocols, specialized staff, and equipment further complicate trial execution.5

Overcoming these barriers is critical to ensuring children receive evidence-based, effective, and age-appropriate treatments. Without robust clinical research, pediatric care risks relying on off-label or suboptimal therapies.6 Addressing these challenges paves the way for safer, more effective pediatric interventions and improved long-term health outcomes.

REGULATORY AND ETHICAL CHALLENGES

Regulatory approval for pediatric drugs is often more complex than for adults, requiring additional age-specific pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data. These studies can prolong development timelines and increase costs.7 Furthermore, regulators mandate post-marketing surveillance and long-term safety monitoring in children, adding further layers of complexity.8

Ethical considerations

Informed consent and assent

Ethical approval in pediatric trials demands dual consent: Informed consent from parents or legal guardians and age-appropriate assent from the child.9 This process necessitates clear, empathetic communication regarding study goals, procedures, risks, and benefits.10 Achieving true understanding and voluntary agreement from both parties is often challenging.

Risk–benefit assessment

Given children’s vulnerability, pediatric trials must demonstrate a favorable risk–benefit ratio. Risks must be minimized, and study designs must be ethically sound and scientifically justified to protect participants’ well-being.11

Recruitment and retention

Recruiting children is ethically sensitive, as parents may hesitate due to safety concerns.5 Retaining participants requires child-friendly environments and ongoing communication to ensure comfort, understanding, and adherence throughout the study.

Equitable access

Equity in pediatric research involves including diverse populations to ensure generalizability.6 Addressing barriers such as socioeconomic status, geographic limitations, and cultural differences is essential for inclusive and representative research.

Regulatory guidelines and differences across regions: USA, Europe, and India

Pediatric clinical trials are governed by region-specific regulatory frameworks, each with unique mandates for trial design, ethical oversight, and post-marketing surveillance. While the overarching goal is to ensure the safety and efficacy of pediatric interventions, the processes and requirements vary significantly between the United States, the European Union, and India. Understanding these differences is critical for multinational trials and harmonized drug development strategies.12-20

Table 1 outlines key differences in pediatric trial regulations across the USA, Europe, and India. While all regions emphasize ethical conduct and informed consent, the USA and Europe have structured requirements and offer regulatory incentives, unlike India,21-25 which follows ethical guidelines without formal incentives.

Table 1: Regulatory requirements for pediatric clinical trials in USA, Europe, and India.
Aspect USA (FDA) Europe (EMA) India (CDSCO/ICMR)
Key Regulation PREA; BPCA. EU pediatric regulation (EC No 1901/2006). New drugs and clinical trials rules, 2019; ICMR ethical guidelines.
Mandatory Pediatric Studies Required under PREA unless waived or deferred Required PIP Required when relevant; pediatric protocol must be submitted
Incentives 6-month market exclusivity under BPCA for voluntary pediatric studies. 6-month extension of SPC. No formal exclusivity incentives.
Ethics Oversight IRB approval; additional safeguards for children under Subpart D Ethics committee and pediatric expert group review Ethics committee review; ICMR guidelines for vulnerable populations
Assent and Consent Parental consent and child assent based on age/maturity. Informed consent+assent required; varies by age. Dual consent and assent per ICMR guidelines.
PMRs Pediatric PMRs may apply. Long-term safety studies and monitoring required. May be required based on risk assessment.
Timeline for Pediatric Plan Early in drug development (Phase I–II) PIP submission before phase II Pediatric details included in the initial application

PREA: Pediatric Research Equity Act, BPCA: Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, FDA: Food and Drug Administration, EMA: European Medicines Agency, CDSCO: Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, PIP: Pediatric Investigation Plan, SPC: Supplementary Protection Certificate, PMRs: Post-marketing requirements, IRB: Institutional Review Board, ICMR: Indian Council of Medical Research

Table 2 compares pediatric clinical trial regulations across the USA, Europe, and India. It highlights differences in regulatory frameworks, incentives, ethical review processes, and post-marketing surveillance.26-30 While the USA and Europe offer well-defined incentives and structured guidelines, India focuses on regulatory support with emerging clarity on incentives and ethical oversight. All regions emphasize informed consent and long-term safety monitoring in pediatric populations.31-36

Table 2: Pediatric Research Regulations and Ethical Guidelines: USA, Europe, and India.
Aspect USA Europe India
Regulatory Frameworks and Requirements PREA and BPCA mandate pediatric trials with incentives. Pediatric Regulation mandates PIP submission and PDCO approval. ICMR guidelines and New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules outline pediatric research frameworks.
Incentives for Pediatric Research Six-month market exclusivity extension for pediatric studies. SPC extensions and other rewards for pediatric drugs. Regulatory facilitation exists, but incentives are less defined.
Ethical Review and Consent Clear guidelines for consent/assent; reviewed by IRBs. Consent/assent guided by regulations; reviewed by Ethics committees. CDSCO-registered Ethics committees oversee consent/assent as per detailed norms.
Post-Marketing Surveillance Long-term safety studies and monitoring of adverse effects in children required. Long-term follow-up and pharmacovigilance plans mandated. Emphasis on post-marketing surveillance and ADR reporting in pediatric trials.

CDSCO: Central drugs standard control organization, IRB: Institutional Review Board, ADR: Adverse drug reaction, PREA: Pediatric research equity act, BPCA: Best pharmaceuticals for children act, PIP: Pediatric investigation plan, ICMR: Indian Council of Medical Research, PDCO: Paediatric Committee of the European Medicines Agency, SPC: Summary of product characteristics,

Ethical considerations in enrolling children in clinical trials

Enrolling children in clinical research requires stringent ethical safeguards due to their vulnerable status. Key considerations include:

  • Informed consent and assent: Consent must be obtained from parents or legal guardians, with age-appropriate assent from the child, ensuring comprehension of the trial’s risks and benefits.37,38

  • Risk-benefit analysis: Risks must be minimized and justified by potential benefits. Trials should ideally offer direct benefits to participants or, if not, involve minimal risk while generating valuable knowledge.39

  • Equitable participant selection: Children should not be chosen solely for convenience. Recruitment should reflect diversity and be scientifically justified to ensure generalizable results.40

  • Privacy and confidentiality: Strict measures must protect participants’ personal and health data, with robust data security protocols in place.41,42

  • Ongoing ethical oversight: Independent ethics committees or IRBs must review protocols and monitor trial conduct to ensure compliance and participant safety throughout the study.43,44

  • Special protections for vulnerable groups: Additional safeguards are essential when enrolling children with disabilities, chronic conditions, or those who are orphaned or institutionalized, to prevent coercion or exploitation.5,45,46

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES

Conducting clinical trials in children presents unique challenges requiring tailored design, regulatory diligence, and collaborative approaches.

  • Age-appropriate protocol design: Protocols must account for developmental differences across age groups, with specific attention to age-based variations in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.47

  • Ethical and regulatory compliance: Studies must adhere to pediatric-specific ethical and regulatory standards, securing appropriate approvals and ensuring ongoing oversight.48

  • Safety monitoring: Rigorous, age-tailored safety protocols are critical. Monitoring adverse events by age group helps identify unique safety profiles.49

  • Effective communication and education: Clear, age-appropriate communication with children and families, supported by tailored educational materials, enhances understanding and engagement.50

  • Recruitment and retention: Recruiting children is challenging due to smaller populations and ethical concerns. Strategies include collaboration with pediatricians and community organizations, minimizing the burden, and offering age-appropriate incentives.51,52

  • Sample size constraints: Small sample sizes reduce statistical power. Researchers must optimize data collection and apply innovative designs to maximize value.53

  • Dosing and pharmacokinetics: Determining safe and effective dosing across pediatric age groups requires dedicated pharmacokinetic studies and child-friendly formulations (e.g., liquids, chewables).54-56

  • Endpoint selection: Trials should use clinically meaningful, developmentally relevant endpoints, supported by validated pediatric assessment tools.57

  • Multidisciplinary collaboration: Input from pediatric specialists and engagement with caregivers, families, and advocacy groups ensure protocols are feasible, ethical, and child-centric.58

OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES IN PEDIATRIC CLINICAL TRIALS

Executing pediatric clinical trials involves navigating unique logistical and site-level hurdles:

  • Site selection and investigator expertise: Trials must be conducted at pediatric-specialized sites with trained personnel. Investigators should possess expertise in pediatric pharmacology, child development, and ethical practices. Ongoing training is essential to uphold quality standards.59,60

  • Trial logistics: Trials must be child- and family-friendly. This includes creating welcoming environments, offering flexible scheduling to accommodate school and family routines, and maintaining open, supportive communication with parents or guardians.61

  • Participant compliance and retention:

    • Engagement: Use developmentally appropriate language to explain procedures to children and families.

    • Incentivization: Employ age-appropriate rewards (e.g., certificates, educational gifts) to encourage participation.

    • Follow-up Systems: Ensure robust systems for monitoring adherence, managing adverse events, and sustaining long-term engagement.62

    • Support Services: Provide transportation, counseling, and logistical support to reduce participation burden and enhance retention.

SOLUTIONS AND BEST PRACTICES

Addressing pediatric trial challenges requires innovative, collaborative, and patient-centered strategies:

Innovative trial designs

  • Adaptive designs: Allow mid-trial modifications based on interim data, enhancing efficiency and reducing participant burden.63

  • Bayesian methods: Incorporate prior data and allow real-time updates on treatment effects, enabling more informed decisions.64

Pediatric trial networks and consortia

  • Collaborative platforms: Pool resources and expertise across sites for large-scale, diverse studies.

  • Standardized protocols: Ensure consistency, quality, and regulatory alignment across participating sites.65

Enhanced recruitment and retention

  • Targeted campaigns: Design outreach tailored to pediatric and parental concerns.

  • Community partnerships: Engage schools, pediatricians, and local organizations to build trust.

  • Supportive retention programs: Maintain ongoing communication and family support throughout the trial.66

Stakeholder engagement

  • Involvement in design: Involve parents, caregivers, and advocacy groups from the planning stage.

  • Education and resources: Equip stakeholders with clear, accessible materials to build trial literacy.

  • Feedback loops: Collect and respond to stakeholder input to refine trial operations and build trust.67

TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS

The role of digital health technologies and remote monitoring is significant.

Digital health tools are transforming the way pediatric trials are designed, conducted, and analyzed:

Digital health and remote monitoring

  • Telemedicine enables virtual visits, reducing travel burden and increasing accessibility.68

  • Wearables and mobile applications offer real-time, noninvasive data collection, minimizing disruption to daily routines.69

  • Remote data capture allows continuous monitoring of adherence, symptoms, and outcomes outside traditional settings.

Electronic health records (EHRs) and real-world evidence (RWE)

  • EHR integration streamlines recruitment, follow-up, and long-term monitoring by connecting clinical and trial data.70

  • RWE utilization enhances generalizability and contextual understanding of treatment effects in broader pediatric populations.

  • Longitudinal insights through EHRs support extended outcome tracking and post-trial surveillance.71

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning

  • Predictive modeling supports patient stratification, trial optimization, and early detection of safety signals.

  • Advanced analytics uncover complex patterns in pediatric datasets, enabling data-driven decisions.

  • Personalized treatment: AI-driven insights can guide individualized therapy based on genetic, clinical, and demographic profiles.

CASE STUDIES AND SUCCESSFUL MODELS

Key trials and their takeaways

Table 3 highlights notable pediatric clinical trials that have successfully addressed key challenges in design, implementation, or outcomes. These case studies including CHAMPION, PEDVAC, PACT, TEENS, and Today demonstrate the impact of innovative methodologies, health delivery, and targeted interventions in improving pediatric telehealth research and outcomes. 72

Table 3: Successful pediatric clinical trials: Case studies.
Clinical Trial Therapeutic Area Key lessons learned
PACT (PANS ) Neurology Multi-center collaboration and adaptive design were crucial in managing a rare neuropsychiatric disorder. Established a standard of care.
COG-ACNS0331 Oncology Risk stratification and long-term follow-up reduced side effects without compromising survival. Advocates helped sustain engagement.
PEDVAC Infectious Diseases Global cooperation enabled rapid enrollment and vaccine rollout during a public health emergency. Demonstrated a strong safety profile.
TEENS Endocrinology Parental involvement and continuous glucose monitoring enhanced treatment adherence in adolescent diabetes. Showed real-world lifestyle impact.
CHAMPION Cardiology Customized devices, advanced imaging, and clinician training improved outcomes in congenital heart defect interventions. Patients experienced faster recovery and fewer complications.

PACT: Preschool autism communication trial, PANS: Pediatric autism neurodevelopmental support, PEDVAC: Pediatric vaccine trial, STEP-TEEN: Semaglutide treatment effect in people with obesity in teens, CHAMPIOS AF: WATCHman FLX Versus NOAC for embolic protection in the management of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Best practices derived from these models

Collaborative networks

Forming consortia boosts trial efficiency, resource sharing, and scalability critical for rare pediatric diseases.73-75

Patient and career engagement

Involving families and advocacy groups improves trial relevance, trust, retention, and ethical alignment.76,77

Adaptive trial designs

Trials like PACT showcased how real-time adjustments lead to smarter decisions and better resource utilization.78

Use of advanced technologies

Trials like CHAMPION76 highlight how imaging, digital tools, and AI elevate both precision and patient experience.

Ethical vigilance

Consistently applying pediatric-centric ethical standards is essential to protect vulnerable populations.79

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

This paper focuses on emerging trends and future perspectives in pediatric clinical research.

Advancements in biomedical science and technology are poised to transform the landscape of pediatric clinical research. Future directions underscore the integration of personalized medicine, decentralized methodologies, and adaptive regulatory frameworks, all geared toward enhancing trial efficiency, ethical integrity, and therapeutic relevance for pediatric populations.

Focus on rare pediatric diseases

The application of genomics and precision medicine is catalyzing a paradigm shift toward the development of targeted therapies for rare pediatric conditions. With an improved understanding of genetic underpinnings, clinical trials are increasingly positioned to focus on monogenic and rare disorders by incorporating stratified designs and advanced diagnostic modalities.80 This shift is likely to be accompanied by the expansion of global rare disease registries and natural history studies to support efficient trial design and regulatory approval.

Emphasis on patient- and family-centric approaches

There is a growing recognition of the importance of incorporating patient and caregiver perspectives into clinical trial design and implementation. This patient-centric model not only aligns with ethical imperatives but also improves recruitment, adherence, and retention rates by enhancing the relevance of study protocols to real-world concerns.81 Engagement strategies include the inclusion of patient advocacy groups during protocol development and the use of age-appropriate tools to facilitate assent and consent processes.

Expansion of decentralized clinical trials (DCTs)

DCT designs, incorporating telemedicine, home health visits, and mobile health technologies, are anticipated to become increasingly prevalent in pediatric research. These models reduce geographic and logistical barriers to participation, thereby enabling broader inclusion of pediatric patients from rural and underserved regions. Furthermore, DCTs may improve adherence and patient comfort, thereby enhancing data quality and generalizability.

Integration of RWE

The incorporation of real-world data sources including EHRs, patient registries, and claims databases can augment the external validity of clinical trial findings. RWE provides essential insights into treatment effectiveness, adherence, and long-term safety in routine clinical settings. It is particularly valuable in pediatrics, where traditional randomized controlled trials are often constrained by ethical and logistical challenges.

Evolving regulatory frameworks

Harmonization of regulatory guidelines

Ongoing international efforts to harmonize regulatory standards, such as between the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization of India, are streamlining clinical trial approval processes. These harmonization initiatives facilitate global pediatric drug development by reducing redundancies and enabling mutual recognition of data across jurisdictions.82

Expansion of regulatory incentives

Emerging regulatory frameworks are increasingly recognizing the need to incentivize pediatric drug development. Mechanisms such as extended market exclusivity, financial grants, and priority review vouchers are being explored or expanded to encourage pharmaceutical investment in this traditionally underrepresented population.

Adoption of adaptive regulatory pathways

Regulatory agencies are increasingly implementing adaptive pathways that allow for conditional or accelerated approvals based on preliminary efficacy and safety data. Such pathways are particularly relevant for pediatric populations with high unmet medical needs, where timely access to promising therapies can be life-saving. Post-marketing surveillance and confirmatory trials remain integral components of these models.83

The role of personalized medicine and genomics

Genomic profiling and risk stratification

Genomic technologies are being leveraged to identify biomarkers associated with disease susceptibility, progression, and therapeutic response in pediatric populations. This stratification facilitates the development of more targeted interventions, reduces heterogeneity, and increases the likelihood of detecting meaningful treatment effects.

Development of targeted therapies

Personalized medicine enables the design of therapies tailored to specific genetic and molecular profiles. In pediatric populations, such approaches offer the promise of increased efficacy with reduced adverse events, particularly in oncology, neurology, and rare diseases.

Pharmacogenomics and dose optimization

Pharmacogenomic studies are increasingly informing dose individualization in children, accounting for genetic polymorphisms affecting drug metabolism and response.84 This ensures safer and more effective treatment regimens, addressing one of the key challenges in pediatric pharmacotherapy.

Biomarker-driven trial designs

The use of predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers is becoming more common in pediatric trials, enabling real-time monitoring of treatment response and early identification of efficacy signals. Biomarker-guided designs can also streamline adaptive trials and reduce the number of patients exposed to suboptimal interventions.85

CONCLUSION

Pediatric clinical trials face significant challenges, including ethical, regulatory, methodological, and operational barriers. Addressing these requires innovative solutions such as adaptive trial designs, digital health tools, RWE, and strong trial networks. Enhanced patient and caregiver engagement, along with advances in genomics and personalized medicine, is reshaping the landscape of pediatric research.

Moving forward, sustained collaboration, regulatory harmonization, and investment in patient-centered, ethically sound research are essential. By embracing innovation and working together, stakeholders can ensure that children receive safe, effective, and evidence-based treatments tailored to their unique needs.

Ethical approval:

Institutional Review Board approval is not required.

Declaration of patient consent:

Patient’s consent is not required as there are no patients in this study.

Conflicts of interest:

Dr. Krishna Upadhye is the Director of Clinical Operations at Krescent Medical Research Pvt. Ltd. This affiliation has been disclosed to the journal and the publisher. Krescent Medical Research Pvt. Ltd. had no role in the conceptualization, writing, or approval of this manuscript, and no funding was received from the company for this work. All views expressed in this review article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Krescent Medical Research Pvt. Ltd.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:

The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.

Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.

References

  1. , , , , , , et al. Paediatric Clinical Research in Europe: An Insight on Experts' Needs and Perspectives. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2021;21:100735.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , . Children are not Just Small Adults: The Urgent Need for High-quality Trial Evidence in Children. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e172.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , . Paediatric Clinical Trials Need Paediatric Clinical Trial Budgets. Acta Paediatr. 2023;112:1982-5.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , . Relational Ethics, Informed Consent, and Informed Assent in Participatory Research with Children with Complex Communication Needs. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022;64:1323-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , , et al. Parents' Perceived Obstacles to Pediatric Clinical Trial Participation: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018;9:33-9.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. , , . Clinical Trials in Children. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;79:357-69.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. . Paediatric Extrapolation: The Panacea for Paediatric Drug Development? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85:672-4.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Postmarket Surveillance: A Review on Key Aspects And measures on the Effective Functioning in the Context of the United Kingdom and Canada. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2019;10:204209861986541.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. , . Consent and Assent in Paediatric Research in Low-income Settings. BMC Med Ethics. 2014;15:22.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. . Research with Children and Young People: The Issue of Parental (Proxy) Consent. Child Soc. 2010;24:227-37.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. , , . The Potential Benefits of Research May Justify Certain Research Risks. Pediatrics. 2019;143:e20182956.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , . The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act and Pediatric Research Equity Act Reach the Age of Majority-an Oncology Perspective. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2020;68:e28749.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , , , et al. Pediatric Antibacterial and Antifungal Trials from 2007 to 2017. Pediatrics. 2018;142:e20181075.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. , . Informed Consent in Pediatric Research. Pediatr Drugs. 2014;17:5-11.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. . Food and Drug Administration Requirements for Clinical Studies in Pediatric Patients. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015;49:666-72.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , , , , et al. Safety Monitoring of Drugs Receiving Pediatric Marketing Exclusivity. Pediatrics. 2008;122:e628-33.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. , , , , , , et al. Pediatric Psychopharmacological Research in the Post EU Regulation 1901/2006 Era. Z Kinder Jugendpsychiatr Psychother. 2014;42:441-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. , , . Parental Perceptions about Informed Consent/Assent in Pediatric Research in Jordan. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017;12:261-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. . Supplementary Protection Certificates are Detrimental to Medicine Affordability. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2018;9:63-5.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. , , , , , , et al. Risk Management Plans as a Tool for Proactive Pharmacovigilance: A Cohort Study of Newly Approved Drugs in Europe. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;96:723-31.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. , . Not Fit for Purpose: The Ethical Guidelines of the Indian Council of Medical Research. Dev World Bioeth. 2013;15:40-7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. , . The Ethics of Placebo-controlled Trials: Methodological Justifications. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;36:510-4.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. . Helping them Decide: A Scoping Review of Interventions used to Help Minors Understand the Concept and Process of Assent. Front Pediatr. 2020;8:25.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. , , , , , , et al. Promoting Education, Mentorship, and Support for Pediatric Research. Pediatrics. 2014;133:943-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. , , , . Post-marketing Surveillance of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions through Spontaneous Reporting: Current Status, Challenges and the Future. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2020;11:204209862093859.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. , , , , , , et al. Assessment of the Impact of Mandated Postmarketing Pediatric-focused Safety Reviews on Safety-related Regulatory Actions 2013-2019. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2023;113:1368-77.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. , . Pediatric Investigation Plans for Specific Immunotherapy: Questionable Contributions to Childhood Health. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2015;26:695-701.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. , , , , . Regulatory Overview on New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules, 2019. Int J Drug Regul Aff. 2023;11:31-42.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. , , . Pediatric Exclusivity and Regulatory Authority. JAMA. 2018;319:21-2.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. , , , . The History of Workforce Concerns in Pediatric Pulmonary Medicine. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2020;58:683-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. , , . Overview of Regulatory Initiatives in the European Union to Stimulate Research and Accelerate Access to Orphan Drugs and other High Medical Need Products. Acta Pol Pharm. 2019;76:3-17.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. , , , , , , et al. Assent, Parental Consent and Reconsent for Health Research in Africa: Thematic Analysis of National Guidelines and Lessons from the Sickle in Africa Registry. BMC Med Ethics. 2022;23:7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. , , . Development of Children's Assent Documents using a Child-centred Approach. J Child Health Care. 2007;11:19-28.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. , . Fostering Ethical Biomedical and Health Research in India During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Res Ethics. 2020;16:1-10.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. , , . Premarket Safety and Efficacy Studies for ADHD Medications in Children. PLoS One. 2014;9:e102249.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. , , , , , , et al. Factors Influencing the Use of a Mobile App for Reporting Adverse Drug Reactions and Receiving Safety Information: A Qualitative Study. Drug Saf. 2016;40:443-55.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. , , , , , , et al. Informed Consent for Neonatal Trials: Practical Points to Consider and a Checklist. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2020;4:e000847.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. , . Development of a Consensus Operational Definition of Child Assent for Research. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18:41.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. , , , . The Risk-benefit Task of Research Ethics Committees: An Evaluation of Current Approaches and the Need to Incorporate Decision Studies Methods. BMC Med Ethics. 2012;13:6.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. , , . Determining Risk in Pediatric Research with no Prospect of Direct Benefit: Time for a National Consensus on the Interpretation of Federal Regulations. Am J Bioeth. 2007;7:5-10.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. , , . More than Just Convenient: The Scientific Merits of Homogeneous Convenience Samples. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2017;82:13-30.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. , , , . Student Body Racial and Ethnic Composition and Diversity-related Outcomes in US Medical Schools. JAMA. 2008;300:1135-45.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. . Privacy and Ethics in Pediatric Environmental Health Research-Part II: Protecting Families and Communities. Environ Health Perspect. 2006;114:1622-5.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. . Research on Data Security and Privacy Protection in the Context of Big Data. Front Comput Intell Syst. 2024;7:29-33.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. . An Institution-based Ethics Review Committee Model for Research on Human Subjects in Eswatini: Composition, Duties and Operations. J Asian Res. 2024;8:1.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. , , , , . Participation of Young People with Disabilities and/or Chronic Conditions in Low-and Middle-income Countries: A Scoping Review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020;62:1259-65.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. , , , , , , et al. Stage-specific Generation of Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Derived Lung Models to Measure CFTR Function. Curr Protoc. 2022;2:e317.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. , , , , , , et al. Consensus Guidelines for the Uniform Reporting of Study Ethics in Anatomical Research within the Framework of the Anatomical Quality Assurance (AQUA) Checklist. Clin Anat. 2018;31:521-4.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. , , , . Safety Monitoring in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) Vaccine. 2015;33:4398-405.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. , , , , . Social Participation of School-aged Children who Use Communication Aids: The Views of Children and Parents. Augment Altern Commun. 2014;30:237-51.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. , , , , . Effective Recruitment and Retention Strategies in Community Health Programs. Health Promot J Austr. 2013;24:104-10.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. , , , , , , et al. Recruitment and Retention Strategies and the Examination of Attrition Bias in a Randomised Controlled Trial in Children's Centres Serving Families in Disadvantaged Areas of England. Trials. 2015;16:79.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. . Small Sample Size. Southwest Respir Crit Care Chron. 2023;11:52-5.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  54. . Paediatric Pharmacokinetics and Drug Doses. Aust Prescr. 2016;39:208-10.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. . Paediatric Medicines: Formulation Considerations. Arch Pharm Pharm Sci. 2017;1:24-7.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  56. , , , , , , et al. Factors Contributing to Fentanyl Pharmacokinetic Variability among Diagnostically Diverse Critically Ill Children. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2019;58:1567-76.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. , , , , . Endpoints in Paediatric Oncology. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;67:33-40.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. , , . (http://www.starchildhealth.org) StaR Child Health: Developing Evidence-based Guidance for the Design, Conduct and Reporting of Paediatric Trials. Arch Dis Child. 2014;100:189-92.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. , , , . The Foundation of the Institute of Paediatric Virology on the island of Euboea, Greece (Review) Exp Ther Med. 2020;20:301.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  60. , . Cardiovascular Paediatric Medicines Development: Have Paediatric Investigation Plans Lost Heart? Pharmaceutics. 2020;12:1176.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. , , , . Bereaved Parents' Involvement in Maternity Hospital Perinatal Death Review Processes: “Nobody Even thought to Ask us Anything”. Health Expect. 2022;26:183-98.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. , , , , , , et al. Real-time Electronic Adherence Monitoring Plus Follow-up Improves Adherence Compared with Standard Electronic Adherence Monitoring. AIDS. 2017;31:169-71.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. , . Adaptive Clinical Trial Designs with Pre-specified Rules for Modifying the Sample Size: Understanding Efficient Types of Adaptation. Stat Med. 2012;32:1259-75.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. , . Prior Setting in Practice: Strategies and Rationales used in Choosing Prior Distributions for Bayesian Analysis In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. . p. :1-12.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  65. , , , , , , et al. Optimisation of Pharmacy Content in Clinical Cancer Research Protocols: Experience of the United Kingdom Chemotherapy and Pharmacy Advisory Service. Clin Trials. 2015;12:257-64.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. , , , . Objective Benefits, Participant Perceptions and Retention Rates of a New Zealand Community-based, Older-adult Exercise Programme. J Prim Health Care. 2014;6:114.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. , , , , , , et al. Three Nested Randomized Controlled Trials of Peer-only or Multiple Stakeholder Group Feedback within Delphi Surveys During Core Outcome and Information Set Development. Trials. 2016;17:1.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. , , , , . Impact of Telemedicine on Visit Attendance for Paediatric Patients Receiving Endocrinology Specialty Care. J Telemed Telecare. 2020;29:126-32.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. , , , , . Life-Logging Data Aggregation Solution for Interdisciplinary Healthcare Research and Collaboration In: In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing 2015. IEEE. p. :2315-20.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. . Optimizing Data Integration in Trials that use EHR Data: Lessons Learned from a Multi-center Randomized Clinical Trial. Trials. 2023;24:1.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. , . Structures for Clinical Follow-up: Newborn Screening. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007;30:600-5.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. , , , , , , et al. Efficacy of Parent-mediated Communication-focused Treatment in Toddlers with autiSm (PACT) Delivered Via Videoconferencing: A Randomised Controlled Trial Study Protocol. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e044669.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. , , , . Assessment of Enrollment Characteristics for Children's Oncology Group (COG) Upfront Therapeutic Clinical Trials 2004-2015. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0230824.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. , , , , , , et al. Therapeutic DNA Vaccination of Vertically HIV-Infected Children: Report of the First Pediatric Randomised Trial (PEDVAC) PLoS One. 2013;8:e79957.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. , , , , , , et al. Clinical Characteristics of Offspring Born to Parents with Type 2 Diabetes Diagnosed in Youth: Observations from TODAY. Children (Basel). 2024;11:630.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. , , , , , , et al. CHAMPION Trial Rationale and Design: The Long-term Safety and Clinical Efficacy of a Wireless Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitoring System. J Card Fail. 2011;17:3-10.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. , , , . Making it Clear and Relevant: Patients and Carers Add Value to Studies through Research Document Reviews. Ment Health Soc Incl. 2016;20:36-43.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  78. , . Benefits, Challenges and Obstacles of Adaptive Clinical Trial Designs. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:79.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. , , , . Ethical Considerations in Adherence Research. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:2429-35.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. , , . From Scientific Discovery to Treatments for Rare Diseases-the View from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences-Office of Rare Diseases Research. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13:196.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. , , , , , , et al. Patient Engagement in Neurological Clinical Trials Design: A Conference Summary. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8:776-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. , , . National Guidelines for Gene Therapy Product (2019) A Road-map to Gene Therapy Products Development and Clinical Trials. Perspect Clin Res. 2021;12:118.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. , , . The Confluence of Accelerated Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Access Pathways. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019;105:935-42.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. , , , , , , et al. Longitudinal Exposure of English Primary Care Patients to Pharmacogenomic Drugs: an Analysis to Inform Design of Pre-emptive Pharmacogenomic Testing. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85:2734-46.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. , , . Molecular Imaging Biomarkers for Oncology Clinical Trials. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:525-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
964

PDF downloads
910
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections

Suggested read for related articles: