MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382645922 · doi:10.1093/jphsr/rmad037

The impact of online medication reviews and educational workshops on deprescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic: a controlled before-after study

2023· article· en· W4382645922 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lina Al‐Sakran, Greg Carney, Malcolm Maclure, Anat Fisher, Thomas L. Perry, Colin R. Dormuth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinistry of Health, British Columbia
KeywordsMedicinePolypharmacyDeprescribingOdds ratioBeers CriteriaPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Logistic regressionOddsMedication therapy managementFamily medicinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingInternal medicinePharmacyPharmacist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives The South Peace Polypharmacy Reduction Project is a quality improvement project in three communities in rural Canada that aimed to reduce polypharmacy and inappropriate prescribing practices in older adults. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a multifaceted intervention consisting of online team-based medication reviews and educational workshops on the number of chronic medications. Methods A controlled before-after design was used to compare if a decrease in the number of chronic medications was associated with the intervention comprising of online team-based medication reviews and educational workshops, compared with two matched control groups that received either a standard medication review or no medication review. Logistic regression models fit with generalized estimated equations were used to identify the impact of the interventions on decreasing the number of chronic medications. Key findings Following a medication review, the percentage of individuals that had deprescribed at least one medication was highest in the intervention group (52%), followed by the medication review controls at 45%, and 36% in non-medication review controls. Individuals in the intervention group were 20% more likely to have at least one medication deprescribed than individuals in the medication review control group (adjusted odds ratio: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.39), whereas they were 42% more likely to deprescribe at least one medication compared with non-medication review controls (adjusted odds ratio: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.25 to 1.61). Conclusions Online team-based medication reviews had a significant impact on decreasing the number of chronic medications in older adults. Furthermore, providing healthcare providers with education can complement the role of other healthcare interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.379
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Health Services ResearchSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207