Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32820421›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2020

Deprescribing for Community-Dwelling Older Adults: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Hanna E Bloomfield, Nancy Greer, Amy M Linsky, Jennifer Bolduc, Todd Naidl, Orly Vardeny, Roderick MacDonald, Lauren McKenzie, Timothy J Wilt

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 126 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
126citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
12.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

126 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Central Nervous System Polypharmacy Among People Living With Dementia.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2025
    Trial
  20. Trial

66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hanna E BloomfieldMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA. hanna.bloomfield@va.gov.
Nancy GreerMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Amy M LinskyVA Boston Healthcare System and Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, USA.
Jennifer BolducMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Todd NaidlMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Orly VardenyMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Roderick MacDonaldMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Lauren McKenzieMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Timothy J WiltMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, USA.
Minneapolis VA Health Care System · USUniversity of Minnesota · USVA Boston Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolypharmacy and use of inappropriate medications have been linked to increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, cognitive impairment, and death. The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.

methodsWe searched OVID MEDLINE Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from 1990 through February 2019 for controlled clinical trials comparing any deprescribing intervention to usual care or another intervention. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, health-related quality of life, and falls. The secondary outcome was use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication review, educational initiatives, and computerized decision support. Data abstracted by one investigator were verified by another. We used the Cochrane criteria to rate risk of bias for each study and the GRADE system to determine certainty of evidence (COE) for primary outcomes.

resultsThirty-eight low and medium risk of bias clinical trials were included. Comprehensive medication review may have reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.95, I DISCUSSION: In community-dwelling people aged 65 years and older, medication deprescribing interventions may provide small reductions in mortality and use of potentially inappropriate medications. REGISTRY INFORMATION: PROSPERO - CRD42019132420.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsIndependent LivingAgedHumansPolypharmacyPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListQuality of Lifecomprehensive medication reviewdeprescribingolder populationspolypharmacy

Identifiers

PMID32820421
PMCPMC7661661
OpenAlexW3080542978

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.