ArticleBMJ open2021
Predicting the risk of drug-drug interactions in psychiatric hospitals: a retrospective longitudinal pharmacovigilance study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- PsychoPharm aggregated risk score (PARS): a multidimensional tool to flag high-risk pharmacotherapy in psychiatric patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Factors associated with potential drug-drug interactions in psychiatric inpatients.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2024Article
- Potential Drug-Drug Interactions among Patients with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: Prevalence, Association with Risk Factors, and Replicate Analysis in 2021.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Observational
- Forecasting admissions in psychiatric hospitals before and during Covid-19: a retrospective study with routine data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Pharmacotherapy, drug-drug interactions and potentially inappropriate medication in depressive disorders.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim was to use routine data available at a patient's admission to the hospital to predict polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions (DDI) and to evaluate the prediction performance with regard to its usefulness to support the efficient management of benefits and risks of drug prescriptions.
designRetrospective, longitudinal study.
settingWe used data from a large multicentred pharmacovigilance project carried out in eight psychiatric hospitals in Hesse, Germany.
participantsInpatient episodes consecutively discharged between 1 October 2017 and 30 September 2018 (year 1) or 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2019 (year 2). OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of rightly classified hospital episodes.
methodsWe used gradient boosting to predict respective outcomes. We tested the performance of our final models in unseen patients from another calendar year and separated the study sites used for training from the study sites used for performance testing.
resultsA total of 53 909 episodes were included in the study. The models' performance, as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic, was 'excellent' (0.83) and 'acceptable' (0.72) compared with common benchmarks for the prediction of polypharmacy and DDI, respectively. Both models were substantially better than a naive prediction based solely on basic diagnostic grouping.
conclusionThis study has shown that polypharmacy and DDI can be predicted from routine data at patient admission. These predictions could support an efficient management of benefits and risks of hospital prescriptions, for instance by including pharmaceutical supervision early after admission for patients at risk before pharmacological treatment is established.
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.