MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916977055 · doi:10.3399/bjgp19x701801

GPs’ management of polypharmacy and therapeutic dilemma in patients with multimorbidity: a cross-sectional survey of GPs in France

2019· article· en· W2916977055 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of General Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de ChicoutimiCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMedicinePolypharmacyDeprescribingCross-sectional studyVignetteOdds ratioConfidence intervalMedical prescriptionGlobal Positioning SystemFamily medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: GPs are confronted with therapeutic dilemmas in treating patients with multimorbidity and/or polypharmacy when unfavourable medication risk-benefit ratios (RBRs) conflict with patients' demands. AIM: To understand GPs' attitudes about prescribing and/or deprescribing medicines for patients with multimorbidity and/or polypharmacy, and factors associated with their decisions. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey in 2016 among a national panel of 1266 randomly selected GPs in private practice in France. METHOD: GPs' opinions and attitudes were explored using a standardised questionnaire including a case vignette about a female treated for multiple somatic diseases, sleeping disorders, and chronic pain. Participants were randomly assigned one of eight versions of this case vignette, varying by patient age, socioprofessional status, and stroke history. Backward selection was used to identify factors associated with GPs' decisions about drugs they considered inappropriate. RESULTS: Nearly all (91.4%) responders felt comfortable or fairly comfortable deprescribing inappropriate medications, but only 34.7% decided to do so often or very often. In the clinical vignette, most GPs chose to discontinue symptomatic medications (for example, benzodiazepine, paracetamol/tramadol) because of unfavourable RBRs. When patients asked for ketoprofen for persistent sciatica, 94.1% considered this prescription risky, but 25.6% would prescribe it. They were less likely to prescribe it to older patients (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36 to 0.63), or those with a stroke history (AOR 0.55, 95% CI = 0.42 to 0.72). CONCLUSION: In therapeutic dilemmas, some GPs choose to prioritise patients' requests over iatrogenic risks. GPs need pragmatic implementation tools for handling therapeutic dilemmas, and to improve their skills in medication management and patient engagement in such situations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it