Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38709466›Full record

ArticleDrugs & aging2024

Measuring Quality of Life in Deprescribing Trials: A Scoping Review.

Wade Thompson, Carina Lundby, Adam Bleik, Harman Waring, Jung Ah Hong, Chris Xi, Carmel Hughes, Douglas M Salzwedel, Emily G McDonald, Jennifer Pruskowski and 6 more

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs & aging, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

16 authors.

Wade ThompsonDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology, and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 317-2176 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2A1, Canada. Wade.thompson@ubc.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8268-4092
Carina LundbyClinical Pharmacology, Pharmacy, and Environmental Medicine, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Adam BleikFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Harman WaringFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Jung Ah HongSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
Chris XiFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Carmel HughesSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Douglas M SalzwedelDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology, and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 317-2176 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2A1, Canada.
Emily G McDonaldDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jennifer PruskowskiSchool of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sion ScottSchool of Healthcare, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Anne SpinewineLouvain Drug Research Institute, Clinical Pharmacy Research Group, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Jean S KutnerUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Trine GraabækHospital Pharmacy Funen, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Shahrzad ElmiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology, and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 317-2176 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2A1, Canada.
Frank MoriartySchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

U.S. Deprescribing Research NetworkR24AG064025 · NIA · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE/RES/EDU · PI BOYD, CYNTHIA MELINDA, STEINMAN, MICHAEL A. · 2019 to 2023
$9.9M
NIA NIH HHS R24AG064025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuality of life (QoL) is an important outcome to capture in clinical trials evaluating deprescribing interventions.

objectiveWe aimed to conduct a scoping review to examine how QoL has been measured in deprescribing trials among older people and identify potentially relevant QoL scales, to better inform QoL measurement in future deprescribing trials.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, Epistemonikos, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of eligible studies (from inception to October 2023). We included randomized and non-randomized comparative studies with a control group that evaluated deprescribing and polypharmacy reduction interventions in people ≥ 65 years of age and measured QoL as an outcome. We also included studies describing the development and validation of QoL scales related to deprescribing, polypharmacy, or medication burden in adults ≥ 18 years of age. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, then full texts. Two independent reviewers extracted data from 25% of eligible studies in order to verify agreement, then a single reviewer extracted data from the remaining studies, which a second reviewer cross-checked. We critically appraised scales based on the COSMIN checklist.

resultsWe retrieved 7290 articles, of which 52 were eligible for inclusion, including 44 deprescribing trials and eight scale development studies. From these studies, we found 21 scales that have been used in the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy (12 generic scales used in clinical trials and nine medication-specific scales). Variations of the generic EQ-5D were the most used scales. The measurement properties of scales for capturing changes in QoL from deprescribing were uncertain. Medication-specific QoL scales have not been employed in deprescribing clinical trials and thus, their performance in this context is also not clear.

conclusionsSeveral existing QoL scales have been applied to the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy clinical trials, and new scales specific to the problem have been proposed. If deprescribing does impact QoL, our findings suggest it is uncertain whether existing QoL scales can practically and reliably capture such a change or whether any scale is best. However, this review compares various aspects of the scales that researchers and clinicians can consider in decisions about measuring QoL in deprescribing trials, and in planning future research. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: osf.io/aez6w.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsPolypharmacyQuality of LifeClinical Trials as TopicHumans

Identifiers

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.