Attitudes Toward Deprescribing in Older Adults and Caregivers: A Survey in Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to describe attitudes toward deprescribing among older adults and caregivers. We recruited 110 adults 65 years and above using at least one prescribed medication for at least 3 months, and 95 unrelated caregivers (18+) of older adults with such characteristics, who answered the validated French version of the revised Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire. More older adults (84.5%) than caregivers (70.5%) (p = .007) would be willing to stop at least one medication if the doctor said it was possible. Conversely, 93.5% of older adults and 78.9% of caregivers were satisfied with the current medications taken (p = .0024). The results did not vary according to age, sex, number of medications taken, education level, or residency. Thus, older adults and caregivers are disposed to undertake deprescribing, regardless of sociodemographic characteristics. However, relying solely on satisfaction with current medications may not be sufficient to identify relevant deprescribing opportunities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".