MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410187346 · doi:10.1111/jgs.19512

Deprescribing Benzodiazepine Receptor Agonists in Older Adults and People With Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4410187346 on OpenAlexaff
Aisling M. McEvoy, Aili Langford, Shin J. Liau, Darshna Goordeen, Emily Reeve, Justin P. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilMonash UniversityAustralian Rotary Health
KeywordsMedicineDeprescribingPsychological interventionMEDLINEDementiaBeers CriteriaCognitionAdverse effectPsychiatryActivities of daily livingGerontologyGeriatricsPolypharmacyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) (benzodiazepines and z-drugs) may provide limited benefits in the management of insomnia when used short-term. However, they increase the risk of harms including falls, fractures, hospitalizations, and cognitive impairment. Deprescribing (cessation) of BZRAs may be beneficial for older adults and people living with cognitive impairment as they are at heightened risk of adverse events. This review investigated the effects of patient-directed, non-pharmacological interventions to support deprescribing of BZRAs used for insomnia in older adults and people living with cognitive impairment. METHODS: Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Medline were searched in January 2024 with no publication date restrictions. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments (ROB2 for randomized studies, ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies) were conducted independently by two authors. Outcomes of interest included the proportion of participants who ceased BZRAs, reduction in BZRAs, switching to another medication, sleep outcomes, and clinical outcomes. Studies were included if they investigated BZRA deprescribing in older adults (≥ 65 years) or people living with cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Seventeen reports analyzing 16 studies in hospital, community, and aged care settings were included. BZRA cessation rates ranged between 23% to 72% for written education (n = 6); 14% to 57% for combined written and verbal education (n = 5); and 9% to 100% for multi-component interventions (n = 6). One report investigated a BZRA deprescribing educational intervention in people with cognitive impairment and found comparable effectiveness to participants without cognitive impairment. Most studies were at a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-directed interventions led to BZRA cessation, although there was significant variability between studies. It is unknown if all interventions examined are similarly effective for people living with cognitive impairment. Further research investigating approaches to deprescribing BZRAs in older adults or people with cognitive impairment is required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207