MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036278912 · doi:10.1186/s13063-020-04482-0

The OPTIMIZE patient- and family-centered, primary care-based deprescribing intervention for older adults with dementia or mild cognitive impairment and multiple chronic conditions: study protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3036278912 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth A. Bayliss, Susan Shetterly, Melanie L. Drace, Jonathan D. Norton, A. R. Green, Emily Reeve, Linda A. Weffald, Leslie Wright, Matthew L. Maciejewski, Orla C. Sheehan, Jennifer L. Wolff, Kathy Gleason, Courtney R. Kraus, Mahesh Maiyani, M. Du Vall, Cynthia M. Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health Authority
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDeprescribingMedicineDementiaIntervention (counseling)PolypharmacyRandomized controlled trialBeers CriteriaCognitionAdverse effectIntensive care medicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most individuals with dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have multiple chronic conditions (MCC). The combination leads to multiple medications and complex medication regimens and is associated with increased risk for significant treatment burden, adverse drug events, cognitive changes, hospitalization, and mortality. Optimizing medications through deprescribing (the process of reducing or stopping the use of inappropriate medications or medications unlikely to be beneficial) may improve outcomes for MCC patients with dementia or MCI. METHODS: With input from patients, family members, and clinicians, we developed and piloted a patient-centered, pragmatic intervention (OPTIMIZE) to educate and activate patients, family members, and primary care clinicians about deprescribing as part of optimal medication management for older adults with dementia or MCI and MCC. The clinic-based intervention targets patients on 5 or more medications, their family members, and their primary care clinicians using a pragmatic, cluster-randomized design at Kaiser Permanente Colorado. The intervention has two components: a patient/ family component focused on education and activation about the potential value of deprescribing, and a clinician component focused on increasing clinician awareness about options and processes for deprescribing. Primary outcomes are total number of chronic medications and total number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). We estimate that approximately 2400 patients across 9 clinics will receive the intervention. A comparable number of patients from 9 other clinics will serve as wait-list controls. We have > 80% power to detect an average decrease of - 0.70 (< 1 medication). Secondary outcomes include the number of PIM starts, dose reductions for selected PIMs (benzodiazepines, opiates, and antipsychotics), rates of adverse drug events (falls, hemorrhagic events, and hypoglycemic events), ability to perform activities of daily living, and skilled nursing facility, hospital, and emergency department admissions. DISCUSSION: The OPTIMIZE trial will examine whether a primary care-based, patient- and family-centered intervention educating patients, family members, and clinicians about deprescribing reduces numbers of chronic medications and PIMs for older adults with dementia or MCI and MCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03984396. Registered on 13 June 2019.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.005

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations53
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207