ArticleDrugs & aging2017
Trends in Drug Prescription Rates for Dementia: An Observational Population-Based Study in France, 2006-2014.
Article in Drugs & aging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends of use and characterisation of anti-dementia drugs users: a large multinational-network population-based study.Age and ageing · 2024Article
- A top 5 list for French general practice.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Generation and validation of algorithms to identify subjects with dementia using administrative data.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the 2011 French guidance updates, cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine are considered optional in the management of dementia and leave physicians free to prescribe based on their clinical expertise.
objectivesThe aims of this study were to analyze the influence of these recent guidance updates on the prescription rates of these drugs and to quantify the impact of potential changes on healthcare expenditures.
methodsPatients over 65 years old from a representative sample of a national administrative claims database, the French national health insurance database, were retrospectively included from 2006 to 2014. Trends of annual prescription rates were tested using adjusted segmented regression analysis. Drug costs with and without prescribers' behavioral changes were estimated.
resultsA total of 119,731 individuals were included and followed during the study period. Among them, 5514 individuals were treated for dementia. According to the unadjusted segmented regression model, there was a significant increase in prescription rates between 2006 and 2010, from 2.23% (95% confidence interval 2.13-2.34) to 2.73% (95% confidence interval 2.62-2.84) of the study population. Since 2011, the trend has reversed with a significant decrease until 2014, from 2.64% (95% confidence interval 2.54-2.75) to 1.92% (95% confidence interval 1.84-2.01). In the multivariate analysis, we also found a gradual decline since 2011, particularly for patients aged 65-69 years and with one or more other chronic diseases. Cost savings associated with prescribers' behavioral changes were estimated at €108 million.
conclusionDrugs prescribed for dementia are on a declining trend with important cost savings, and this was concomitant with guidance updates that left physicians to rely on their clinical expertise while managing dementia.
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.