Preventive health therapy and behavior outcomes from a brown bag medication review for older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality associated with preventable diseases can be reduced with the use of preventive health services. We evaluated the uptake and retention of preventive health behaviors and management of accidental medication poisonings in older adults after a health prevention educational component was combined with a brown bag medication review. METHODS: This study used a cohort design and was conducted in six urban senior centers and three independent senior living communities in Detroit, Michigan. Participants included 85 older adults (>60 years old) taking five or more medications with 63 participants returning follow up materials. Pharmacy personnel conducted brown bag medication reviews that were combined with a preventive health education component. Information was collected on medications, vaccinations, supplement use, and accidental medication poisoning management. Participants were given written recommendations on prescription medications and preventive health therapies to improve health and medication use. An investigator developed program satisfaction survey was administered immediately after the review. An investigator-developed follow-up preventive health implementation survey was conducted at least 3 months later to assess recommendation implementation. RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 75.9 ± 8.5 years. Fifty-six older adults had 124 recommendations in preventive health in total (1-5/participant). Eleven participants had no recommendations. Sixty-three participants (74%) returned follow-up preventive health surveys. Twenty-three percent of recommendations were already implemented with 34% planned to be done in the future. Poisoning management knowledge increased for 13 participants, reporting they would call the poison control center. The program was well received, with participants reporting high satisfaction scores (4.8 ± 0.7 out of 5). CONCLUSIONS: Brown bag medication reviews can be an effective method to promote the uptake of preventive health behaviors among older adults, but additional accidental medication poisoning management education is still needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".