Evidence mapPaperPMID 41146847Full record

ReviewSage open aging

Examining Medical Interventions in Older Adults with Limited Life Expectancy-Opportunities and Challenges for De-implementation.

Nancy L Schoenborn, Anna S Beeber, Vadim A Dukhanin, Ariel R Green, Cara L McDermott, Katherine A Ornstein, Caroline E Sloan, Judith B Vick, Martha Abshire Saylor

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sage open aging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Nancy L SchoenbornDivision of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5053-5132
Anna S BeeberJohns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Vadim A DukhaninDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8685-0027
Ariel R GreenDivision of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Cara L McDermottDivision of Geriatrics and Palliative Care, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Katherine A OrnsteinJohns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Caroline E SloanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Judith B VickDepartment of Medicine, Section of Geriatrics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Martha Abshire SaylorJohns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Reducing Polypharmacy and Fall Risk for Multi-Morbid Adults with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseK23HL159239 · DUKE UNIVERSITY · 2025 to 2025
$180k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL159239
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The benefits and harms of medical interventions shift as patients age, calling for re-evaluation of each intervention's appropriateness and alignment with patients' preferences. Continued use of medical interventions when harms outweigh benefits is common in older adults with limited life expectancy. This critical review aims to describe the opportunities and challenges of de-implementation in older adults with limited life expectancy, focusing on the role of patient preference and shared decision making. Findings: We describe three examples where de-implementation may be considered in older adults with limited life expectancy-cancer screening, polypharmacy, end-of-life care-and the associated de-implementation challenges. The challenges stem from the need to change established behavior and shift from age-based to life expectancy-based decision making. Existing de-implementation frameworks do not incorporate patient preferences whereas shared decision-making frameworks do not consider the challenges specific to de-implementation. Conclusions: Significant research gaps exist at the intersection of de-implementation, shared decision making, and aging research. Considerations for de-implementation would benefit from evaluating the preference sensitivity of the decision. This should be informed by the strength of evidence, the extent that the potential harms outweigh the benefits, and whether the intervention is life-sustaining where de-implementation would be irreversible.

Indexed as

agingcommunicationdecision-makinghealth services researchlife expectancy/longevityliterature reviewmultimorbidity

Identifiers

PMID41146847
PMCPMC12553872

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.