Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36042024›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2022

Rating scales to measure adverse effects of medications in people with intellectual disability: a scoping review.

Neasa Kelly, Andrew Kilmartin, Kevin Lannon, Caren Lee, Rory McLoughlin, Lara Mulvanny, Omnyiah Mohamed, Mairead Treacy, Karen Rossi, Juliette O'Connell

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Neasa KellySchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Andrew KilmartinSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Kevin LannonSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Caren LeeSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Rory McLoughlinSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Lara MulvannySchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Omnyiah MohamedSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Mairead TreacySchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Karen RossiSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Juliette O'ConnellSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. jaoconne@tcd.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1114-9778
Trinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIntellectual disability (ID) is a chronic neurodevelopmental condition characterised by limitations in intelligence and adaptive skills with an onset prior to the age of 18 years. People with ID have complex healthcare needs and are more likely than the general population to experience multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy, with subsequent increased risk of adverse medication effects. The aim of this scoping review is to characterise rating scales used to measure adverse effects of medication in people with ID.

methodsFour online databases (PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and OpenGrey) were searched in April 2020. Studies were assessed for inclusion against pre-specified eligibility criteria. Reference lists of included studies were hand searched. Data extraction was carried out by two independent reviewers and key findings were tabulated for consideration. Studies were assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

resultsThe search resulted in 512 unique records, of which fifteen met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen scales were identified. All scales assessed adverse effects of psychotropics only. Of the scales, only one, the Matson Evaluation of Drug Side Effects, which focuses on psychotropic medications, was originally developed for use in a population with ID.

conclusionThe Matson Evaluation of Drug Side Effects scale appears to be the most reliable and well-researched scale in people with ID. However, a scale which measures adverse effects across multiple medication classes would be valuable for use in this population.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsIntellectual DisabilityAdolescentHumansPolypharmacyPsychotropic DrugsPsychotropic DrugsAdverse medication effectsIntellectual disabilityMedicationRating scales

Identifiers

PMID36042024
PMCPMC9546988
OpenAlexW4293685941

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.