Potentially inappropriate medication use at ambulatory care visits by elderly patients covered by National Health Insurance in Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use is an important and preventable safety concern in the care of elderly patients and has been associated with adverse drug reactions, hospitalization, and mortality. Although PIM use for the elderly is a common and serious public health issue worldwide, there are few studies examining PIM use in the ambulatory care setting in Korea. METHODS: To examine the prevalence and risk factors of PIM use from ambulatory care visits by elderly patients covered by National Health Insurance (NHI) in Korea, the nationwide prescription claims data of elderly patients' ambulatory care visits in 2006 were analyzed. RESULTS: Potentially inappropriate prescriptions were identified using extensive criteria that included Beers', Zhan's, and Canadian criteria. In 2006, 3,770,978 elderly patients received 40,995,267 prescriptions. 36.7% of the total prescriptions for elderly patients who visited ambulatory care clinics were identified as PIM use. Findings in this study indicated that the strongest risk factors for PIM prescriptions were the number of drugs prescribed and visit characteristics. CONCLUSION: Therefore, it is necessary to develop the explicit criteria of PIM prescription in Korea that can be included in the Drug Utilization Review (DUR) system, which is expected to lead to more appropriate and judicious prescribing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".