Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32681402›Full record

Trial reportDrugs & aging2020

Factors Affecting Prescriber Implementation of Computer-Generated Medication Recommendations in the SENATOR Trial: A Qualitative Study.

Kieran Dalton, Denis O'Mahony, Shane Cullinan, Stephen Byrne

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drugs & aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Implementation science in care for older adults across healthcare settings: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 1 country.

Kieran DaltonPharmaceutical Care Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. kieran.dalton@ucc.ie.ORCID 0000-0003-1209-8079
Denis O'MahonyDepartment of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Shane CullinanSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Stephen ByrnePharmaceutical Care Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
University College Cork · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

Heath Research Board Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN) SWAT AwardSENATOR project, supported by FP7 2007-2013 Grant agreement number 305930
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe SENATOR trial intervention included the provision of computer-generated medication recommendations to physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults (≥ 65 years), with the aim of reducing in-hospital adverse drug reactions. Interim data analysis during the trial revealed that the prescriber implementation rates of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations were lower than expected across all six trial sites.

aimThe aim of this qualitative study was to identify the factors affecting prescriber implementation of the medication recommendations in the SENATOR trial.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with trial researchers and physician prescribers who were provided with SENATOR recommendations. Content analysis was used to identify the most relevant domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) that affected recommendation uptake.

resultsTen trial researchers and fourteen prescribers were interviewed across the six trial sites. Eight TDF domains were found to be most relevant in affecting prescriber implementation: 'environmental context and resources', 'goals', 'intentions', 'knowledge', 'beliefs about consequences', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'social/professional role and identity', and 'social influences'. Interviewees felt that there was often a disconnect between the time prescribers were reviewing the patient and the point at which the recommendations were provided. However, when recommendations were reviewed, prescriber inertia was highly pervasive, with a particular reluctance to make pharmacotherapy changes outside their own specialty. Implementation was facilitated by recommendations reaching a 'decision-maker', but this was often not possible as the software could not evaluate the entire clinical context of patients, and thus frequently produced recommendations of low clinical relevance.

conclusionThis study has demonstrated that the clinical relevance of the SENATOR prescribing recommendations was a significant factor affecting their implementation. Whilst software refinement will be necessary to improve the quality of recommendations, future interventions will need to be multifaceted to overcome the complex prescriber specialty culture within the acute hospital environment.

Indexed as

Decision Making, Computer-AssistedQualitative ResearchAgedDrug PrescriptionsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHospitalizationHumansInappropriate PrescribingMalePhysiciansPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListProfessional Role

Identifiers

PMID32681402
OpenAlexW3042998152

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.