ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2013
A comparison of the application of STOPP/START to patients' drug lists with and without clinical information.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Pharmacist Interventions in Improving Medication Use in Hospitalised Older Patients Diagnosed With Cardiovascular Diseases: INFAR Before-and-After Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Trial
- Effects of "Fit fOR The Aged" (FORTA) on pharmacotherapy and clinical endpoints--a pilot randomized controlled study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Trial
- Reduction of potentially inappropriate medications using the STOPP criteria in frail older inpatients: a randomised controlled study.Drugs & aging · 2014Trial
- Tools for Evaluating Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults: A Scoping Review Assessing Suitability for Register-Based Research.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Article
- Article
- Potentially Inappropriate Medications and Potential Prescribing Omissions in Elderly Patients Receiving Post-Acute and Long-Term Care: Application of Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment Criteria.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Polypharmacy, potentially serious clinically relevant drug-drug interactions, and inappropriate medicines in elderly people with type 2 diabetes and their impact on quality of life.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2020Article
- Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions in Ambulatory Elderly Patients Living in Rural Areas of Romania Using STOPP/START (Version 2) Criteria.Clinical interventions in aging · 2020Article
- Potentially inappropriate prescriptions of antithrombotic therapies in older outpatients: a French multicenter cross-sectional study.European geriatric medicine · 2019Article
- Discontinuation of medications at the end of life: A population study in Belgium, based on linked administrative databases.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Inappropriate Prescribing in Patients Older than 65 Years in Primary Health Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- The impact of medication review with version 2 STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment) criteria in a French nursing home: a 3-month follow-up study.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2019Article
- Community pharmacists' views of using a screening tool to structure medicines use reviews for older people: findings from qualitative interviews.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Health system costs of potentially inappropriate prescribing in Ontario, Canada: a protocol for a population-based cohort study.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Number of medications or number of diseases: what influences underprescribing?European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
- Potentially inappropriate prescribing and associated factors in elderly patients at hospital discharge in Brazil: a cross-sectional study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2017Article
- [Potentially inappropriate prescribing in older Spanish population according to STOPP/START criteria (STARTREC study)].Atencion primaria · 2017Article
- Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Elderly Haemodialysis Patients Using the STOPP Criteria.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2016Article
- Potentially inappropriate medications in elderly ambulatory and institutionalized patients: an observational study.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2016Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA European screening tool (STOPP/START) has been formulated to identify the prescribing of potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Pharmacists working in community pharmacies could use STOPP/START as a guide to conducting medication use reviews; however, community pharmacists do not routinely have access to patients' clinical records.
objectiveTo compare the PIM and PPO detection rates from application of the STOPP/START criteria to patients' medication details alone with the detection rates from application of STOPP/START to information on patients' medications combined with clinical information.
settingCommunity Pharmacy.
methodThree pharmacists applied STOPP/START to 250 patient medication lists, containing information regarding dose, frequency and duration of treatment. The PIMs and PPOs identified by each pharmacist were compared with those identified by consensus agreement of two other pharmacists, who applied STOPP/START criteria using patients' full clinical records.
main outcome measureThe main outcome measures were: (1) PIM and PPO detection rates among pharmacists with access to patients' clinical information compared to PIM and PPO detection rates among pharmacists using patients' medication information only, and (2) the levels of agreement (calculated using Cohen's kappa statistic (k)) for the three most commonly identified PIMs and PPOs.
resultsPharmacists with access to patients' clinical records identified significantly fewer PIMs than pharmacists without (p = 0.002). The three most commonly identified PIMs were benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors and duplicate drug classes, with kappa (k) statistic agreement ranges of 0.87-0.97, 0.60-0.68 and 0.39-0.85 respectively. PPOs were identified more often (p < 0.001) when clinical information was considered. The three most commonly identified PPOs were: bisphosphonates, β2-agonists and anti-platelets, with kappa (k) statistic agreement ranges of 0.89-1.0, 0.50-0.80 and 0.5-1.0 respectively.
conclusionsPIM detection is likely to be overestimated using STOPP and PPO detection underestimated using START when STOPP/START is used in isolation of clinical information. Agreement for a selected number of criteria for which clinical information is not required is good, suggesting that some criteria may be reliably deployed without clinical information during a medicines use review. However, for STOPP/START criteria to be deployed more effectively by pharmacists, access to the full clinical record is recommended.
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.