ReviewAtencion primaria2013
[Suitability of pharmacological treatment in patients with multiple chronic conditions].
Review in Atencion primaria, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic Adherence and Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Older Adults with Polypharmacy in Primary Health Care.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Observational
- [Pharmacological treatment conciliation methodology in patients with multiple conditions].Atencion primaria · 2014Review
- [Methods for measuring the suitability of pharmacological treatment in the elderly with multiple conditions and on multiple drugs].Atencion primaria · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify tools for measuring the appropriateness of drug therapy useful in patients with multiple chronic conditions.
designWe performed a literature review. DATA SOURCES: The following database were consulted (December 2009): Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Spanish Medical Index (IME) to detect tools for measuring the appropriateness of treatment in patients with multiple chronic conditions, or otherwise elderly or polypharmacy. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were identified both qualitative and quantitative methodology, both theoretical and field work, both original and revised work and included work from all areas of the health system. 108 articles were retrieved, of which we selected 59. The consultation of their references include 20 jobs allowed, resulting in a total of 59 articles. DATA EXTRACTION: Of all the tools identified, the researchers performed a selection of those with possible utility for classified PP. The articles were classified into implicit and explicit methods and the characteristics of the field works were tabulated.
resultsWe identified two implicit methods (MAI and Hamdy) and 6 explicit methods (Beers criteria, IPET, STOPP/START, ACOVE, CRIME and NORGEP). None was specific to patients with multiple chronic conditions. The questionnaire MAI, the Beers criteria and its modifications are most often used in literature. The advantages of explicit criteria means that many of them have been developed recently.
conclusionThere are several tools to measure the appropriateness and none of them has been designed for a population of patients with multiple chronic conditions yet, which by its nature requires a specific approach spreads.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.