Stakeholders' perspectives about challenges, strategies and outcomes of importance associated with adherence to appropriate polypharmacy in older patients – A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Older patients experience challenges when taking polypharmacy. Studies have applied different interventions to improve adherence to polypharmacy. However, inconsistencies in outcomes have impeded the synthesis of evidence. To generate high-quality studies and selectively report outcomes, a Core Outcome Set (COS) is advocated. Objectives: This study explored stakeholders' perspectives about the challenges older patients face when taking polypharmacy, strategies to overcome each challenge, and outcomes of importance that may contribute to COS development. Methods: = 7) compiled from previous studies associated with adherence to polypharmacy was presented to participants for their views. Content analysis was conducted to identify key themes and outcomes proposed by participants. Results: Participants suggested 11 multidimensional healthcare system-related, medication-related, patient-related, and socioeconomic-related challenges and 16 educational and behavioural strategies associated with adherence to polypharmacy in older patients. Participants agreed with the importance of the seven outcomes presented and suggested a further six outcomes they deemed to be important for use in trials aimed at improving adherence to appropriate polypharmacy in older patients. Conclusions: Adherence to polypharmacy was deemed challenging, requiring supportive interventions. A list of 13 outcomes in the context of adherence to appropriate polypharmacy in older patients was identified to inform a future study that will develop a COS for clinical trials targeting interventions to improve adherence to appropriate polypharmacy in older patients.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".