Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32103967›Full record

ReviewTherapeutics and clinical risk management2020

Failure to Reach a Consensus in Polypharmacy Definition: An Obstacle to Measuring Risks and Impacts-Results of a Literature Review.

Najwa Taghy, Linda Cambon, Jean-Marie Cohen, Claude Dussart

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. The impact of palliative care consults on medicines optimisation for patients with cancer referred to hospice care at the end of life: a retrospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Impact of Specialized Clinics on Medications Deprescribing in Older Adults: A Pilot Study in Ambulatory Care Clinics in a Teaching Hospital.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. An Atypical Case of Extreme Polypharmacy.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Najwa TaghyLaboratory P2S (Health Systemic Process), University of Lyon, University Claude Bernard of Lyon 1, Lyon, EA4129, France.
Linda CambonResearch Chair in Prevention, University of Bordeaux, ISPED, Inserm, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Team Methods for Population Health Intervention Research, Bordeaux, France.
Jean-Marie CohenOpen Rome, Paris, France, Laboratory P2S (Health Systemic Process), University of Lyon, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, EA4129, France.
Claude DussartLyon Public Hospices, Central Pharmacy, Laboratory P2S (Health Systemic Process), University of Lyon, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, EA4129, France.
Parcours santé systémiqueBordeaux Population Health · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe risk of polypharmacy is on the rise in most industrialized countries, threatening to burden their health systems. Although many definitions exist and numerous concepts are found in literature as synonyms, the phenomenon of polypharmacy remains poorly defined. The aim of this literature review is to provide an overview of available definitions of polypharmacy, to analyse their convergences and divergences and to discuss the consequences on the assessment of the problem.

methodsA literature review was conducted to identify all published systematic reviews on definitions of polypharmacy available via Scopus and Pubmed databases. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the selected reviews. Available definitions and other characteristics were extracted; summarised in a table and analysed.

resultsSix systematic reviews were identified. They were published between 2000 and 2018. Three focussed on definitions of polypharmacy in the elderly; two in the general population and one in children. The strategy adopted in reviews is more rigorous in the most recent ones. However, they remain, at best, partially exhaustive. The definitions found in the literature used two main approaches, either (i) quantitative, applying varying thresholds and types of polypharmacy based on the number of medications being taken by the patient (ii) qualitative, based on the clinical indications and effects of a given drug regimen, with a growing number of characteristics to describe polypharmacy. The term "inappropriate" is increasingly associated with polypharmacy especially in studies that aimed to use this definition to identify possible solutions for healthcare providers in the field related to aging.

conclusionThis review confirms a high variability and an evolution in the approaches defining "polypharmacy" in the absence of a consensus following standardized criteria. That makes it very difficult to estimate and measure the outcomes associated with this phenomenon.

Indexed as

definitionliterature reviewpolypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID32103967
PMCPMC7023902
OpenAlexW3004668207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.