MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409837787 · doi:10.4103/amhs.amhs_129_25

Prescription for Deprescribing

2025· article· en· W4409837787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anil Kakunje, Pramendra Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Medicine and Health Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDeprescribingMedical prescriptionFamily medicinePharmacologyPolypharmacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Be the change you wish to see in the World.” –Mahatma Gandhi Deprescribing is an essential part of good clinical practice and can be a prescription in itself. Medical training and culture teach to prescribe drugs, write prescriptions, communicate the need for medications, escalate the doses, handle the adverse effects, and so on. The curriculum hardly covers deprescription topics. This is an era of polypharmacy. It is common to see patients on a big list of drugs and many times prescribed drugs themselves cause more problems. Deprescribing is the process of tapering, stopping, discontinuing, or withdrawing drugs, with the goal of managing polypharmacy and improving outcomes.[1] Deprescribing focuses on being proactive to address medication-related problems that have not previously been identified or satisfactorily managed, recognize the poor benefit-to-risk ratio of drugs, and prevent future problems. According to Scott et al. in 2015, deprescribing is the reduction or discontinuation of medications when their current and potential risks outweigh their current or potential benefits, keeping in consideration the patient’s medical status, functioning, values, and preferences.[2] The end goal of deprescribing is not necessarily the cessation of medications but rather their over usage. Fields which deal with chronic ailments need to examine deprescribing in a deeper manner.[3] Inappropriate prescribing and polypharmacy in older persons are associated with increased risk of falls, adverse drug events, hospital admissions, and death.[4] As per one data from Canada, as the population ages, older people are living with multiple chronic conditions. In 2021, one in four seniors in Canada was prescribed 10 or more unique drug classes.[5] The concept of deprescribing started with the geriatric practice but now has influenced all other departments and all ages. A general literature search reveals that guides and algorithms for deprescribing give approaches for deprescription in general terms and focus more on when or why a medication should be stopped rather than how to stop it.[1] There can be varied reasons why deprescribing would be advised such as changing risk–benefit ratio over time, aging, general medical comorbidity, changes in patients’ choice and insight, social factors, relocation, changing financial status, and coping strategy.[3] The steps of deprescribing as per an article by Woodward are (1) reviewing all current medications, (2) identifying medications to be ceased, substituted, or reduced, (3) planning a deprescribing regimen in partnership with the patient, and (4) frequently reviewing and supporting the patient.[6] Swapnil Gupta who has done extensive research on this topic in her article in psychiatric times described in detail the steps of deprescribing with a focus on psychiatric drugs.[3] The steps are: Choose the right time Compile a list of all the patient’s medications Initiate the discussion with the patient Introduce deprescribing to the patient Identify the medication which is most beneficial to taper Develop a plan Monitor and adapt as necessary. There needs to be a detailed discussion on deprescribing by a qualified professional involving the patient with careful monitoring. The important things to consider in the process are timing, strength of treatment alliance, level of risk, past history, coping strategy, and social support.[7] The primary physician should involve other treating professionals as needed. There are tools and scales to assess and assist in deprescribing. The challenges in deprescribing can be patient unwillingness, inconsistent follow-ups, brief visits, frequent change of doctors or clinic, doctor’s fear to change the drugs, the complexity of the cases, and inconsistent guidelines. The way forward should be to improve awareness about deprescribing, include the topic in more detail in medical training and across specialties, hospitals can have deprescription committees, enhance professional discussions and research on the topic, and always look at the benefit-to-risk ratio in writing prescriptions each time. Polypharmacy should be reserved only for essential cases. The doctor’s approach should include deprescription also. There is a need for well-designed large, long-term studies on deprescribing which looks at clinical outcomes from all angles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.322
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Medicine and Health SciencesSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207