Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28877256›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2017

Medication and supplement use in older people with and without intellectual disability: An observational, cross-sectional study.

Jure Peklar, Mitja Kos, Máire O'Dwyer, Mary McCarron, Philip McCallion, Rose Anne Kenny, Martin C Henman

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. The use of proton pump inhibitors among older adults with intellectual disability: A cross sectional observational study.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2018
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jure PeklarFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5616-3883
Mitja KosFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Máire O'DwyerSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Mary McCarronIDS-TILDA School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Philip McCallionSchool of Social Work, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Rose Anne KennyThe Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA), Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Martin C HenmanSchool of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Trinity College Dublin · IEUniversity of Ljubljana · SITemple University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUnderstanding the medication and supplement use of aging people is critical to ensuring that health service providers in primary care can optimise use of these agents. An increasing number of people with different levels of intellectual disability (ID) are living in the community and becoming for the first time substantial users of primary health care services. This, however, brings new challenges that need to be addressed at the primary health care level. We quantified the use of medicines and food supplements and described the associated patterns of morbidity in the two comparable cohorts of aging population with and without intellectual disability.

methodThis research aligned participants of 50 years and over who lived in the community from two nationally representative cohorts of older people; those with ID from the Intellectual Disability Supplement (n = 238) and those without ID (n = 8,081) from the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing.

resultsData showed that both medication and supplement use in the two groups was prevalent but that those with ID received more of both medications and supplements (e.g. polypharmacy was 39.0% in ID vs. 18.1% in non-ID cohort). Moreover, based on an analysis of the therapeutic groups and medications used that treatment was more intense in the ID cohort (95.8 vs. 7.0 International Non-proprietary Names per 100 participants). Supplement use was almost twice as prevalent in the ID group but substantially less diverse with only 10 types of supplements reported. Morbidity was higher in the ID group and showed a higher prevalence of neurological and mental health disorders.

conclusionThe results highlight that the burden of therapy management and the potential risks in those ageing with ID differs substantially from those ageing without ID. Understanding the medication and supplement use of people aging with intellectual disability (ID) is critical to ensuring that health service providers in primary/ambulatory care can optimise use of these agents.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsPolypharmacyAgedAgingCross-Sectional StudiesData CollectionFemaleGroup HomesHumansIntellectual DisabilityIrelandLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPrevalencePrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID28877256
PMCPMC5587307
OpenAlexW2753138003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.