Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30858256›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine2019

Identifying Adverse Drug Events in Older Community-Dwelling Patients.

Caitriona Cahir, Emma Wallace, Anthony Cummins, Conor Teljeur, Catherine Byrne, Kathleen Bennett, Tom Fahey

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Adverse drug reactions and associated patient characteristics in older community-dwelling adults: a 6-year prospective cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Using INTERCheckDrugs - real world outcomes · 2020
    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 2 countries.

Caitriona CahirDivision of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland caitrionacahir@rcsi.ie.
Emma WallaceHRB Centre for Primary Care Research, Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Anthony CumminsPerdana University-Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Selangor, Malaysia.
Conor TeljeurHealth Information and Quality Authority, George's Court, Dublin, Ireland.
Catherine ByrneDivision of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Kathleen BennettDivision of Population Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Tom FaheyHRB Centre for Primary Care Research, Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IEHealth Information and Quality AuthorityPerdana University · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate a patient-report instrument for identifying adverse drug events (ADEs) in older populations with multimorbidity in the community setting.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 859 community-dwelling patients aged ≥70 years treated at 15 primary care practices. Patients were asked if they had experienced any of a list of 74 symptoms classified by physiologic system in the previous 6 months and if (1) they believed the symptom to be related to their medication, (2) the symptom had bothered them, (3) they had discussed it with their family physician, and (4) they required hospital care due to the symptom. Self-reported symptoms were independently reviewed by 2 clinicians who determined the likelihood that the symptom was an ADE. Family physician medical records were also reviewed for any report of an ADE.

resultsThe ADE instrument had an accuracy of 75% (95% CI, 77%-79%), a sensitivity of 29% (95% CI, 27%-31%), and a specificity of 93% (95% CI, 92%-94%). Older people who reported a symptom had an increased likelihood of an ADE (positive likelihood ratio [LR+]: 4.22; 95% CI, 3.78-4.72). Antithrombotic agents were the drugs most commonly associated with ADEs. Patients were most bothered by muscle pain or weakness (75%), dizziness or lightheadedness (61%), cough (53%), and unsteadiness while standing (52%). On average, patients reported 39% of ADEs to their physician. Twenty-six (3%) patients attended a hospital outpatient clinic, and 32 (4%) attended an emergency department due to ADEs.

conclusionOlder community-dwelling patients were often not correct in recognizing ADEs. The ADE instrument demonstrated good predictive value and could be used to differentiate between symptoms of ADEs and chronic disease in the community setting.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansIndependent LivingMaleMultimorbidityRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and Questionnairesadverse drug eventsolder populationspatient reported outcomesprimary care

Identifiers

PMID30858256
PMCPMC6411408
OpenAlexW2921422753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.