MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6957754784 · doi:10.60692/evdce-w7q18

Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacist-led Deprescribing Interventions in Nursing Homes and Ambulatory Care Settings in Elderly Patients: A Systematic Review

2022· article· en· W6957754784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeprescribingCost effectivenessPsychological interventionAmbulatory careHealth carePolypharmacyMEDLINECochrane LibraryAmbulatory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) are drugs in which the adverse risks exceed the clinical benefits, lacking evidence-based indications, potentially interact with other medications.PIM use is common in older adults who are frequently treated with multiple medications.PIM use in older adults is associated with many complications.Aim: To critically appraise and systematically evaluate the existing studies on the effectiveness of pharmacist-led deprescribing in health service utilization, clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and cost utility.In nursing home and ambulatory care settings and patients aged 65 years and above.Methods: PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched between 1st to 2nd July 2021 and updated on 25 th December 2021 to select studies that compare pharmacist-led deprescribing in nursing home and ambulatory care settings with usual care.Outcomes related to health service utilization, clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and cost utility were evaluated.Results: A total of 3944 relevant records were identified through database searching.A further ten records were identified by following up citations and reference lists of the selected studies.After assessment, nine studies were included in the review.Four of the included studies reported outcomes relating to both health service utilization and clinical effectiveness, three studies reported only health service utilization, and the two economic studies reported cost effectiveness and cost utility respectively.Six out of seven studies that reported health service utilization outcomes found improvement in health service utilization after the implementation of the pharmacist-led deprescribing.However, there is no positive clinical effectiveness outcomes, and no worldwide studies for the economic outcomes.Conclusion: This evidence of moderate to high quality.Pharmacist-led deprescribing was effective only in reducing PIMs usage and medication burden for older adults in nursing home and ambulatory care setting, but with no clinical effectiveness outcomes.It is essential to evaluate the economic outcomes in different countries other than Canada (high-income county).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.014
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→