ArticleBMJ open2019
A structured medication review tool to promote psychotropic medication optimisation for adults with intellectual disability: feasibility study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comorbidities in People With Intellectual Disability With and Without Schizophrenia and Schizophrenia Without Intellectual Disability: A Swedish Register Study (IDcare).Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2026Article
- Structured Medication Review and Shared Decision-Making in Patients with Mild Intellectual Disabilities Who Use Psychotropic Medication.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- How Is Psychotropic Use for Challenging Behaviour in People With Intellectual Disability Understood by Stakeholders? A Concept Analysis Using Rodgers' Evolutionary Approach.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Article
- Management of psychotropic medications in adults with intellectual disability: a scoping review.Annals of medicine · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the feasibility of delivering structured psychotropic medication review in community services for adults with intellectual disability (ID).
designSingle-arm feasibility study conducted over a 6-month period.
settingSpecialist community ID teams in England.
participantsPsychiatrists working with adults with ID and adults with ID who had been prescribed psychotropic medication.
interventionA structured web-based psychotropic medication review tool (the HealthTracker-based structured medication review) comprising measures of therapeutic benefit and adverse side-effects was made available for use by psychiatrists in routine clinic appointments. A summary measure of medication effectiveness was graphically presented to aid discussion and decision-making.
main outcome measuresFeasibility metrics including number of people with ID referred, eligible and recruited, and uptake of the medication review tool in naturalistic clinical settings. Psychiatrist and patient feedback was collected to assess acceptability of the intervention and suggestions for development.
resultsFifteen psychiatrists from five clinical teams took part. In total 94 potentially eligible people with ID were referred, of whom 79 (84%) were recruited and together underwent 97 medication reviews over the 6-month study period. Feedback from participants with ID was favourable. Psychiatrists indicated that the HealthTracker-based structured medication review was broadly acceptable and suggested adaptations to improve integration with existing information technology systems and to enhance patient involvement in the review.
conclusionsStructured psychotropic medication review can be used in community services for adults with ID as part of a programme of medication optimisation. It would be feasible to test clinical and patient outcomes of the HealthTracker-based medication review in a randomised clinical trial.
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.