MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2931325142 · doi:10.2196/13582

Medication Management Models for Polymedicated Home-Dwelling Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions: Protocol of a Systematic Review

2019· review· en· W2931325142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Filipa Pereira, Pauline Roux, Joëlle Rosselet Amoussou, María Manuela Martins, Armin von Gunten, Henk Verloo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)MedicineGerontologyMultiple Chronic ConditionsComputer scienceFamily medicineAlternative medicineChronic diseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Older adults with multiple chronic diseases commonly require complex medication regimes. When combined with frailty, cognitive impairment, and changing pharmacological prescriptions, older adults' polymedication regimes increase the risk of medication-related problems (MRPs) and hospitalization. Effective, well-organized medication management could avoid MRPs and their clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Identify medication management models and analyze their impact on managing and preventing MRPs for polymedicated, home-dwelling older adults. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of published articles in relevant professional scientific journals from inception until March 31, 2019, in the following electronic databases,: Embase; Medline OvidSP; PubMed (NOT Medline[sb]); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) EBSCO; PsycINFO OvidSP; Cochrane Library, Wiley; and Web of Science. We will also hand search the bibliographies of all the relevant articles found and search for unpublished studies. We will consider publications in English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese. Retrieved articles will be screened for eligibility. Statistical analyses will be conducted following the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statements. Data will be analyzed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 25.0 (IBM Corp), and Review Manager, version 5.5 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration). RESULTS: A preliminary search in Embase delivered 3272 references. This preliminary search allows us to complete our research strategy with equation development and to search the other databases. Relevant articles identified will allow for searching the reference lists for unpublished studies. The inclusion and exclusion criteria will be rigorously respected in the study selection. The entire study is expected to be completed by January 2020. CONCLUSIONS: This review will provide an exhaustive view of medication management models that could be effective for polymedicated, home-dwelling older adults and will allow us to analyze their impact on managing and preventing MRPs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018117287; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=117287 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/77fCfbCjT). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13582.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.069
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0690.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.022
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.006

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 head0.569
GPT teacher head0.641
Teacher spread0.072 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→