Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24062215›Full record

ReviewDrugs & aging2013

The medication appropriateness index at 20: where it started, where it has been, and where it may be going.

Joseph T Hanlon, Kenneth E Schmader

Abstract readEvaluation StudyReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs & aging, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

102 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Definition and Measurement of Physical and Chemical Restraint in Long-Term Care: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Joseph T HanlonDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, jth14@pitt.edu.
Kenneth E Schmader

Funding

VARIABILITY, STABILITY & SMOOTHNESS OF WALKINGP30AG024827 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI JENNIFER S BRACH · 2004 to 2026
$28.6M
Resource Core 3 - Metabolomics CoreP30AG028716 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Virginia B Kraus · 2006 to 2026
$24.6M
Resilience to Mobility Impairment: Neural Correlates and Protective FactorsR01AG037451 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI AIZENSTEIN, HOWARD J, ROSANO, CATERINA · 2011 to 2015
$2.9M
Enhancing the Detection and Management of Adverse Drug Events in the Nursing HomeR01HS018721 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANDLER, STEVEN MARK · 2010 to 2013
$2.0M
Longitudinal Impact of CNS Polypharmacy on Geriatric SyndromesR01AG027017 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANLON, JOSEPH T · 2006 to 2012
$801k
UPITT Program for Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research in AgingK07AG033174 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANLON, JOSEPH T · 2009 to 2013
$461k
AHRQ HHS R01 HS018721AHRQ HHS R01-HS018721NIA NIH HHS K07 AG033174NIA NIH HHS K07-AG033174NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024827NIA NIH HHS P30-AG024827NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028716NIA NIH HHS P30-AG028716NIA NIH HHS R01 AG027017NIA NIH HHS R01-AG 027017NIA NIH HHS R01 AG037451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for older adults is a major public health concern. While there are multiple measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, the medication appropriateness index (MAI) is one of the most common implicit approaches published in the scientific literature. The objective of this narrative review is to describe findings regarding the MAI's reliability, comparison of the MAI with other quality measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, its predictive validity with important health outcomes, and its responsiveness to change within the framework of randomized controlled trials. A search restricted to English-language literature involving humans aged 65+ years from January 1992 to June 2013 was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases using the search term 'medication appropriateness index'. A manual search of the reference lists from identified articles and the authors' article files, book chapters, and recent reviews was conducted to identify additional articles. A total of 26 articles were identified for inclusion in this narrative review. The main findings were that the MAI has acceptable inter- and intra-rater reliability, it more frequently detects potentially inappropriate prescribing than a commonly used set of explicit criteria, it predicts adverse health outcomes, and it is able to demonstrate the positive impact of interventions to improve this public health problem. We conclude that the MAI may serve as a valuable tool for measuring potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDrug PrescriptionsHumansInappropriate PrescribingRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID24062215
PMCPMC3831621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.