ReviewDrugs & aging2004
The National Service Framework for Older People: England's approach to ending age discrimination in services and therapeutics.
Review in Drugs & aging, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 159 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a Conceptual Framework for an Age-Friendly Health System: A Scoping Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Chronic hepatitis C in the aged: much ado about nothing or nothing to do?Drugs & aging · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 1997, the new Labour Government in the UK embarked on an ambitious programme of reform. One of the key changes has been the publication of a series of National Service Frameworks. The National Service Framework for Older People (NSFOP) sets out a 10-year programme that has as its principal standard rooting out age discrimination. Together with its companion documents, a series of robust milestones and standards are set out that have to be met. Although generally welcomed by the profession, the NSFOP has been criticised by some because it mandates the initiation of new 'intermediate care' services that may be seen as denying older people the opportunity for admission to mainstream hospital care. Monitoring tools covering both procedures and prescribing have been developed. The government-produced frameworks mirror guidelines produced by the profession and include a number of prescribing recommendations, e.g. the use of antihypertensives and aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) in the prevention of stroke, and the use of calcium, vitamin D and bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis. In tackling age discrimination, both direct and indirect barriers to effective prescribing need to be considered. The evidence base on the effectiveness of medication in older people is more limited due to the previous systematic exclusion of older people from clinical trials. The consequent lack of evidence of efficacy, coupled with perhaps a natural reluctance to prescribe potentially toxic medication, may lead to underprescribing. Other indirect causes of age discrimination may include difficulties for older people attending hospitals for drug monitoring, and the difficulties of translating the results of trials into meaningful endpoints that older patients can understand and thus make valid decisions about whether they wish to take the particular drug or not. At the same time as the NSFOP argues against age discrimination, other government policies may operate in a contradictory manner. Examples include the trend to make drugs available over the counter in pharmacies and for which the patient has to pay rather than receive them free, the restriction of some prescription-only drugs from the health service, and the need for referral to specialist services for some drugs, e.g. sildefanil, which older people may be reluctant to access. Successfully combating age discrimination is likely to require a regulatory framework, continued monitoring, tackling indirect forms of discrimination, as well as embedding antidiscrimination policies in all facets of health education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.