Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34681280›Full record

ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Individualized versus Standardized Risk Assessment in Patients at High Risk for Adverse Drug Reactions (The IDrug Randomized Controlled Trial)-Never Change a Running System?

Katja S Just, Catharina Scholl, Miriam Boehme, Kathrin Kastenmüller, Johannes M Just, Markus Bleckwenn, Stefan Holdenrieder, Florian Meier, Klaus Weckbecker, Julia C Stingl

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 88% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Katja S JustInstitute of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, 52074 Aachen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6782-8078
Catharina SchollResearch Department, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, 53175 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1463-5619
Miriam BoehmeResearch Department, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, 53175 Bonn, Germany.
Kathrin KastenmüllerMax-Planck Research Group, Würzburg Institute of Systems Immunology, University of Würzburg, 97078 Würzburg, Germany.
Johannes M JustDepartment of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Medical Faculty of the University of Witten/Herdecke, 58448 Witten, Germany.
Markus BleckwennDepartment of General Practice, Medical Faculty, Leipzig University, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1975-5369
Stefan HoldenriederInstitute of Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Florian MeierWilhelm Loehe University of Applied Sciences (WLH), 90763 Fürth, Germany.
Klaus WeckbeckerDepartment of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, Medical Faculty of the University of Witten/Herdecke, 58448 Witten, Germany.
Julia C StinglInstitute of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, 52074 Aachen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1566-8156
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices · DERWTH Aachen University · DEWitten/Herdecke University · DELeipzig University · DEUniversity Hospital Bonn · DEUniversity of Würzburg · DEWilhelm Löhe University for Applied Sciences · DE

Funding

European Union 668353Federal Ministry of Education and Research 01GY1333A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare effects of an individualized with a standardized risk assessment for adverse drug reactions to improve drug treatment with antithrombotic drugs in older adults. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in general practitioner (GP) offices. Patients aged 60 years and older, multi-morbid, taking antithrombotic drugs and at least one additional drug continuously were randomized to individualized and standardized risk assessment groups. Patients were followed up for nine months. A composite endpoint defined as at least one bleeding, thromboembolic event or death reported via a trigger list was used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. In total,

Indexed as

adverse drug reactionsbleedingDOACsolder adultspersonalized medicinepharmacogeneticspharmacogenomicsphenprocoumonthromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID34681280
PMCPMC8538435
OpenAlexW3205968849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.