Trial reportPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2015
Association between drug-specific indicators of prescribing quality and quality of drug treatment: a validation study.
Trial report in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing professional confidence in the art of prescribing-a randomized controlled study on structured collegial discussions during internship.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Trial
- Association between drug-specific indicators of prescribing quality and quality of drug treatment: a validation study.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2015Trial
- Causes of death after first time venous thromboembolism.Thrombosis journal · 2024Article
- Performance of 3 Sets of Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Older People to Identify Inadequate Drug Treatment.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Clinical relevance of potentially inappropriate medications and potential prescribing omissions according to explicit criteria-a validation study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Association between recorded medication reviews in primary care and adequate drug treatment management - a cross-sectional study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Article
- Use of statins in the elderly according to age and indication-a cross-sectional population-based register study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Article
- Quality of prescribing in older people from a broad family physician perspective: a descriptive pilot study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Article
- The associations of geriatric syndromes and other patient characteristics with the current and future use of potentially inappropriate medications in a large cohort study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Developing confidence in basic prescribing skills during medical school: a longitudinal questionnaire study investigating the effects of a modified clinical pharmacology course.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Clinical relevance of the STOPP/START criteria in hip fracture patients.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the concurrent validity of three European sets of drug-specific indicators of prescribing quality
methodsIn 200 hip fracture patients (≥65 years), consecutively recruited to a randomized controlled study in Sahlgrenska University Hospital in 2009, quality of drug treatment at study entry was assessed according to a gold standard as well as to three drug-specific indicator sets (Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, French consensus panel list, and German PRISCUS list). As gold standard, two specialist physicians independently assessed and then agreed on the quality for each patient, after initial screening with STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment).
resultsAccording to the Swedish, French, and German indicator sets, 82 (41%), 54 (27%), and 43 (22%) patients had potentially inappropriate drug treatment. A total of 141 (71%) patients had suboptimal drug treatment according to the gold standard. The sensitivity for the indicator sets was 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.43; 0.59), 0.33 (0.26; 0.41), and 0.29 (0.22; 0.37), respectively. The specificity was 0.83 (0.72; 0.91), 0.88 (0.77; 0.94), and 0.97 (0.88; 0.99). Suboptimal drug treatment was 2.0 (0.8; 5.3), 1.9 (0.7; 5.1), and 6.1 (1.3; 28.6) times as common in patients with potentially inappropriate drug treatment according to the indicator sets, after adjustments for age, sex, cognition, residence, multi-dose drug dispensing, and number of drugs.
conclusionsIn this setting, the indicator sets had high specificity and low sensitivity. This needs to be considered upon use and interpretation.
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.