Determining proton pump inhibitor prescription dispensing patterns and adherence to STOPP criteria for Nova Scotia Seniors Pharmacare Program beneficiaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are often prescribed potentially inappropriately. The screening tool of older person's potentially inappropriate prescriptions (STOPP) for therapeutic dose PPIs has been adapted to examine PPI discontinuation, dose reduction, or switching to Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonist (H2RA) after 60 days. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present study were to (1) describe the use of acid suppression therapy (PPIs and H2RAs) 60 and 90 days after a new PPI dispensing, (2) assess predictors of lack of adherence to adapted STOPP criteria for PPI use, and (3) assess PPI dispensing over time. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of beneficiaries of the Nova Scotia Seniors Pharmacare (NSSP) aged 66 years or older who were newly dispensed a PPI between January 1, 1997 and March 31, 2011. The main outcome measure was adherence to the adapted STOPP criteria, which was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 14,453 participants were included: 89.8% beginning on standard dose and 10.2% beginning on high-dose PPI. Of those beginning on high-dose PPI, 26.4% were dispensed high-dose PPI at day 60 and 30.2% were dispensed high-dose PPI at day 90. Predictors of lack of adherence to our adapted STOPP criteria included age ≥86 years, rural residence, and hospitalization within 1 year prior to cohort entry. CONCLUSIONS: Many PPI prescriptions dispensed for NSSP beneficiaries fail to adhere to the STOPP criteria. Predictors of lack of adherence to the adapted STOPP criteria were identified.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".