Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2024
A Prediction Model to Identify Clinically Relevant Medication Discrepancies at the Emergency Department (MED-REC Predictor): Development and Validation Study.
Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. 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.
- Multimorbidity, polypharmacy and frailty in critically ill older adults.European geriatric medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany patients do not receive a comprehensive medication reconciliation, mostly owing to limited resources. We hence need an approach to identify those patients at the emergency department (ED) who are at increased risk for clinically relevant discrepancies.
objectiveThe aim of our study was to develop and externally validate a prediction model to identify patients at risk for at least 1 clinically relevant medication discrepancy upon ED presentation.
methodsA prospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted at the University Hospitals Leuven and General Hospital Sint-Jan Brugge-Oostende AV, Belgium. Medication histories were obtained from patients admitted to the ED between November 2017 and May 2022, and clinically relevant medication discrepancies were identified. Three distinct datasets were created for model development, temporal external validation, and geographic external validation. Multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise selection was used to select the final model. The presence of at least 1 clinically relevant discrepancy was the dependent variable. The model was evaluated by measuring calibration, discrimination, classification, and net benefit.
resultsWe included 824, 350, and 119 patients in the development, temporal validation, and geographic validation dataset, respectively. The final model contained 8 predictors, for example, age, residence before admission, number of drugs, and number of drugs of certain drug classes based on Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical coding. Temporal validation showed excellent calibration with a slope of 1.09 and an intercept of 0.18. Discrimination was moderate with a c-index (concordance index) of 0.67 (95% CI 0.61-0.73). In the geographic validation dataset, the calibration slope and intercept were 1.35 and 0.83, respectively, and the c-index was 0.68 (95% CI 0.58-0.78). The model showed net benefit over a range of clinically reasonable threshold probabilities and outperformed other selection criteria.
conclusionsOur software-implemented prediction model shows moderate performance, outperforming random or typical selection criteria for medication reconciliation. Depending on available resources, the probability threshold can be customized to increase either the specificity or the sensitivity of the model.
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.