Polypharmacy among older individuals with heart failure: trends between 2000 and 2017 in the province of Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Pharmacological management of heart failure and comorbidities may result in polypharmacy, but there are few population-based studies that portray the use of medications over time. We aimed to describe the trends in polypharmacy and medication use in older adults with heart failure. METHODS: We performed a study including all adults >65 years with heart failure between 2000 and 2017 using health administrative databases in Quebec, Canada. Medication use was ascertained by the presence of at least one claim in each year. We defined three levels of polypharmacy: ⩾10, ⩾15 and ⩾20 different medications/year, and evaluated the use of guideline-recommended and potentially inappropriate medications. We calculated age- and sex-standardized proportions of users each year. RESULTS: The use of ⩾10, ⩾15 and ⩾20 medications increased from 62.2%, 30.6% and 12.2% in 2000 to 71.9%, 43.9% and 22.7%, respectively, in 2017. The combination of β-blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) was used by 30.4% of individuals in 2000 and 45.5% in 2017. ACEI/ARB users decreased from 65.8% in 2000 to 62.1% in 2017. Potentially inappropriate medication use decreased over time. CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is significant among older adults with heart failure. Implications of such medication burden should be investigated.
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 | 0.001 | 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".