ArticleBMC geriatrics2019
An inventory of collaborative medication reviews for older adults - evolution of practices.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medication safety in family caregiving of older adults: home visits including interviews, observations, and medication reviews.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Implementation of an Interdepartmental Collaborative Medication Review to Reduce Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Hospitalized Older Adults: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Identifying Medication Review Topics to Be Documented in a Structured Form in Electronic Health Record Systems: Delphi Consensus Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Intervention description of pharmacist-facilitated medication reviews in Nordic primary care settings: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Medication Review: What's in a Name and What Is It about?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Developing an interprofessional people-centred care model for home-living older people with multimorbidities in a primary care health centre: A community-based study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2022Article
- Developing and piloting a self-assessment tool for medication review competence of practicing pharmacists based on nationally set competence criteria.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Integrating medication risk management interventions into regular automated dose dispensing service of older home care clients - a systems approach.BMC geriatrics · 2021Article
- Identifying Gaps in Community Pharmacists' Competence in Medication Risk Management in Routine Dispensing.Innovations in pharmacy · 2021Article
- Collaborative Medication Reviews to Identify Inappropriate Prescribing in Pre-Admission Medications at Emergency Department Short-Term Ward.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2021Article
- Policy and vision for community pharmacies in Finland: A roadmap towards enhanced integration and reduced costs.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCollaborative medication review (CMR) practices for older adults are evolving in many countries. Development has been under way in Finland for over a decade, but no inventory of evolved practices has been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify and describe CMR practices in Finland after 10 years of developement.
methodsAn inventory of CMR practices was conducted using a snowballing approach and an open call in the Finnish Medicines Agency's website in 2015. Data were quantitatively analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitatively by inductive thematic content analysis. Clyne et al's medication review typology was applied for evaluating comprehensiveness of the practices.
resultsIn total, 43 practices were identified, of which 22 (51%) were designed for older adults in primary care. The majority (n = 30, 70%) of the practices were clinical CMRs, with 18 (42%) of them being in routine use. A checklist with criteria was used in 19 (44%) of the practices to identify patients with polypharmacy (n = 6), falls (n = 5), and renal dysfunction (n = 5) as the most common criteria for CMR. Patients were involved in 32 (74%) of the practices, mostly as a source of information via interview (n = 27, 63%). A medication care plan was discussed with the patient in 17 practices (40%), and it was established systematically as usual care to all or selected patient groups in 11 (26%) of the practices. All or selected patients' medication lists were reconciled in 15 practices (35%). Nearly half of the practices (n = 19, 44%) lacked explicit methods for following up effects of medication changes. When reported, the effects were followed up as a routine control (n = 9, 21%) or in a follow-up appointment (n = 6, 14%).
conclusionsDifferent MRs in varying settings were available and in routine use, the majority being comprehensive CMRs designed for primary outpatient care and for older adults. Even though practices might benefit from national standardization, flexibility in their customization according to context, medical and patient needs, and available resources is important.
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.