SynthesisJournal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID2019
Effectiveness of medication reviews in identifying and reducing medication-related problems among people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of medication reviews in identifying and reducing medication-related problems among people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2019Pooled it
- Impact of nurse-led home visits on medication management and use of medical screenings for adults with intellectual disabilities: a randomised-controlled trial.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- A Rapid Mapping Review of Medication Burden in Adults with an Intellectual Disability: What We Know and What We Do Not Know.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2026Review
- Aggressive challenging behavior in adults with intellectual disability: An electronic register-based cohort study of clinical outcome and service use.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Article
- A study on prescriptions contributing to the risk of high anticholinergic burden in adults with intellectual disabilities: retrospective record linkage study.Annals of general psychiatry · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Health Care Disparities for Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Ohio.Community mental health journal · 2021Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPolypharmacy is common in people with intellectual disabilities. Using multiple medication may lead to unintended medication-related problems (MRPs). Medication review may serve as a tool to reduce MRPs. This systematic review assessed the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of medication reviews in identifying and reducing MRPs in people with intellectual disabilities.
methodLiterature databases were searched up to August 2017. Studies were selected that included the effect of medication reviews on identifying and/or reducing MRPs in people with intellectual disabilities with no restriction of type of medication, age and level of intellectual disabilities.
resultsThe eight studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria report that systematic medication reviews appear to assist in the identification and reduction of MRPs.
conclusionThere is a lack of studies about the effect of medication reviews on identification and reduction of MRPs, especially health outcomes for people with intellectual disabilities. Further studies with long-term follow-up are needed.
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.