Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40139713›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Views of key stakeholders on deprescribing preventive medication in people living with dementia: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

Clare Bates, Nikolaos Efstathiou, Claire Sutton, Nesrein Hamed, Ian Maidment

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Clare BatesSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK clare.bates@nihr.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-1439-313X
Nikolaos EfstathiouSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5811-8982
Claire SuttonSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Nesrein HamedPharmacy, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
Ian MaidmentPharmacy, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4152-9704

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAs people get older, they tend to take more preventive medication such as statins, beta-blockers and anti-coagulants to help prolong their lives. The risks of taking medication can start to outweigh the benefits in older people, and whether those with comorbidities want to extend these years of poor health is another consideration. One-third of older people will develop dementia, and they may not have the mental capacity to decide whether to continue or withdraw preventive medication. In these cases, deprescribing is left to advocates, such as healthcare professionals and family members. This systematic review will look at the views of stakeholders, including advocates, people living with dementia and any other people involved in the decision-making process for deprescribing preventive medication in dementia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review of qualitative evidence using thematic synthesis and an inductive approach will be conducted. The following databases and platforms will be searched: Embase, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Central Library, OATD, ProQuest, Scopus and the Web of Science, along with manual searches through citation mining and grey literature. Only primary qualitative studies (or the qualitative elements of mixed method studies) will be used. There will be no date limit, and the search will be completed by April 2025. Only English-language articles will be used. The included studies will present views and experiences about deprescribing specifically preventive medication in dementia cases. Principles identified by Cochrane for qualitative studies will be used as guidance. Covidence will facilitate two independent reviewers to identify relevant studies, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used to assess quality. NVivo will be used to manage the extracted findings from the included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not applicable for this study as no original data is going to be collected as it is a systematic review. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed open-access publication and at conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023476394. Any changes made to the protocol will be reported on PROSPERO.

Indexed as

DementiaDeprescriptionsStakeholder ParticipationDecision MakingHumansQualitative ResearchResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAgedClinical Decision-MakingCLINICAL PHARMACOLOGYDementiaETHICS (see Medical Ethics)Polypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID40139713
PMCPMC11950945

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.