MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986165719 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckz186.360

Are general practitioners willing to deprescribe in oldest-old patients with polypharmacy?

2019· article· en· W2986165719 on OpenAlexaff
Katharina Tabea Jungo, Sophie Mantelli, Zsofia Rozsnyai, Emily Reeve, Rosalinde K. E. Poortvliet, Jacobijn Gussekloo, Nicolas Rodondi, Sven Streit

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeprescribingPolypharmacyMedicineFamily medicineDiscontinuationGlobal Positioning SystemGerontologyPsychiatryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Managing the growing number of oldest-old patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in primary health care poses an increasing public health challenge. Since inappropriate polypharmacy can harm patients’ health, general practitioners (GPs) should regularly review patients’ medications and, if necessary, deprescribe. This case vignette study evaluates the deprescribing decisions of GPs from 31 countries and compares the factors influencing GPs’ deprescribing decisions. We invited GPs to participate in an online survey, containing a) three cases of increasingly dependent oldest-old multimorbid patients with potentially inappropriate polypharmacy and b) Likert-scale questions assessing the importance of factors influencing deprescribing. We presented each case with and without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). For each case, we asked whether GPs would deprescribe any medication and, if so, which one(s). We calculated percentages of GPs deprescribing at least one medication in each case, compared cases with/without CVD history and different levels of dependency in activities of daily living, and calculated the percentage of factors rated as important or very important. Of 3175 invited GPs from 31 countries, 53% responded (N = 1’706) with a mean age of 50 years and 60% females. Results are preliminary, but despite some differences across GP characteristics (male/female, age) and across countries, GPs generally showed a high willingness to deprescribe in oldest-old patients (>80 years) with polypharmacy. GPs were more likely to deprescribe in patients with a higher level of dependency, in the absence of history of CVD, and when patients are on statins, proton-pump inhibitors or potentially inappropriate pain medication. Factors GPs rated as important or very important for the deprescribing decision were patients’ quality of life, risks and benefits of medications, patients’ life expectancy, and potential negative health outcomes resulting from deprescribing. Key messages Despite international differences, most GPs report they would deprescribe in older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. The results will facilitate the development of interventions supporting general practitioners to deprescribe.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207