ArticleBMJ open2020
Evaluation of clarity of the STOPP/START criteria for clinical applicability in prescribing for older people: a quality appraisal study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polypharmacy definition and prevalence in heart failure: a systematic review.Heart failure reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pharmacist-led deprescribing of cardiovascular and diabetes medication within a clinical medication review: the LeMON study (Less Medicines in Older Patients in the Netherlands), a cluster randomized controlled trial.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Trial
- Detectability of Medication Errors With a STOPP/START-Based Medication Review in Older People Prior to a Potentially Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admission.Drug safety · 2022Trial
- Frequency and Acceptance of Clinical Decision Support System-Generated STOPP/START Signals for Hospitalised Older Patients with Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity.Drugs & aging · 2022Trial
- Applicability of STOPP/START prescribing criteria in integrated Swedish administrative health registries and a Swedish population-based cohort.European geriatric medicine · 2024Observational
- Medication Deprescribing in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis: A Prospective Controlled Quality Improvement Study.Kidney medicine · 2024Article
- Attitudes and barriers towards deprescribing in older patients experiencing polypharmacy: a narrative review.npj aging · 2024Review
- Usefulness of STOPP/START criteria and Beers criteria for prescribing in geriatric patients in a tertiary health care center, Raipur, Central India.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Inappropriate Prescriptions in Older People-Translation and Adaptation to Portuguese of the STOPP/START Screening Tool.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Review
- Potentially inappropriate prescribing in a falls clinic using the STOPP and START criteria.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2022Article
- Reviewing Potentially Inappropriate Medication in Hospitalized Patients Over 65 Using Explicit Criteria: A Systematic Literature Review.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAppropriate prescribing in older people continues to be challenging. Studies still report a high prevalence of inappropriate prescribing in older people. To reduce the problem of underprescribing and overprescribing in this population, explicit drug optimisation tools like Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) have been developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of STOPP/START criteria in daily patient care by assessing the clarity of singular criteria.
designQuality appraisal study.
methodsFor each of the 114 STOPP/START criteria V.2, elements describing the action ( PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was the clarity rating per element, categorised into high (>67.7%), moderate (33.3%-67.7%) or low (<33.3%). Secondary, factors that positively or negatively affected clarity most were identified. Additionally, the nature of the conditions was further classified into five descriptive components: disease, sign, symptom, laboratory finding and medication.
resultsSTOPP recommendations had an average clarity rating of 64%, 60% and 69% for actions, conditions and explanations, respectively. The average clarity rating in START recommendations was 60% and 57% for actions and conditions, respectively. There were no statements present to substantiate the prescription of potential omissions for the 34 START criteria.
conclusionsOur results show that the clarity of the STOPP/START criteria can be improved. For future development of explicit drug optimisation tools, such as STOPP/START, our findings identified facilitators (high clarity) and barriers (low clarity) that can be used to improve the clarity of clinical practice guidelines on a language level and therefore enhance clinical applicability.
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.