ArticleBiomedicine hub
Use of Potentially Inappropriate Medications among Older Adults with Dementia or Cognitive Impairment Attending Memory Clinics: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Biomedicine hub. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identification and evaluation of drug-related problems in community pharmacy in Turkey: a descriptive prevalence study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Older adults with dementia who are on multiple medications are more vulnerable to the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), which can significantly increase the risk of adverse events and drug-related problems. PIMs use is prevalent and varies among older adults with dementia or cognitive impairment (CI) attending memory clinics. However, the prevalence of PIMs, polypharmacy, and hyper-polypharmacy among older adults with dementia or CI who are attending memory clinics is not well understood. We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses to examine the overall estimate of the prevalence of the PIMs, polypharmacy, and hyper-polypharmacy use among older adults attending memory clinics, with dementia or CI. The secondary objective of this study will be to compile a list of commonly implicated PIMs and to investigate factors that may be associated with using PIMs in this population. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Cochrane library, EBSCOhost CINAHL, and Ovid International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) will be systematically searched by a researcher (R.S.) with the help of a librarian (C.C.). All databases will be searched from inception to May 05, 2023. Cross-sectional, cohort, randomized clinical trials, quasi-experimental, and case-control studies will be included if they assess PIM's use among older adults with dementia and/or CI. A step-by-step guide by Pai et al. [Natl Med J India. 2004;17(2):86-95] will be followed when conducting this systematic review (S.R.). The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist will be followed for reporting this SR. Conclusion: The findings from this SR/MA will identify the pooled prevalence of PIMs, providing a more precise estimate of the true prevalence of the PIMs, polypharmacy, hyper-polypharmacy in older adults with dementia or CI who are attending memory clinics at primary, secondary, or tertiary healthcare settings by considering the results of multiple studies.
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.