ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Sedative co-medication patterns across frailty states in people with HIV: a network-based study.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPeople with HIV are living longer, but frailty may increase vulnerability to adverse drug interactions, particularly with sedative medications.
aimTo describe sedative co-medication patterns across frailty states using network-based analysis, and to identify key medications driving interaction complexity.
methodThis cross-sectional study analyzed 321 participants using sedatives from the Positive Brain Health Now Cohort (mean age: 53 years), categorized as robust (30.2%), prefrail (47.0%), or frail (22.7%). Sedative use was classified using the Sedative Load Model, and frailty was assessed with a modified Fried Frailty Phenotype. Co-medication networks were constructed for robust, prefrail, and frail groups, with metrics such as Neighborhood Shift Scores (NESH) and ΔBetweenness used to evaluate network dynamics. Edge-level Observed-to-Expected ratios highlighted significant drug pairings and interaction risks.
resultsFrail individuals exhibited the most interconnected sedative network (graph density: 0.24; average degree: 7.31) followed by prefrail (graph density: 0.18; average degree: 6.67) and robust groups (graph density: 0.13; average degree: 4.61). Medications with high network influence included mirtazapine (robust-to-prefrail: NESH = 2.05; ΔBetweenness = 0.23), gabapentin (robust-to-frail: NESH = 2.46, ΔBetweenness = 0.10), and pregabalin (prefrail-to-frail: NESH = 2.55; ΔBetweenness = 0.71). High-risk sedative pairs in frail individuals included hydromorphone-clonazepam (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 3.07; interaction severity: D), amitriptyline-oxycodone (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 1.92; severity: D), and quetiapine-citalopram (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 2.12; severity: D). Prefrail individuals had intermediate-risk combinations, including clobazam-levetiracetam (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 81.5; severity: C), and gabapentin-hydroxyzine (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 3.58; severity: D). Robust individuals showed fewer and lower-risk patterns, such as amitriptyline-pregabalin (Observed-to-Expected ratio: 4.00; severity: C). Network differences reflect increasing polypharmacy and adverse interaction risks with advancing frailty.
conclusionSedative co-medication patterns vary meaningfully across frailty states in people with HIV. Frailty is associated with more complex networks and a greater likelihood of high-risk drug interactions. Medications influencing these patterns can help identify opportunities for safer prescribing. The prefrail stage may offer a timely window for interventions aimed at minimizing polypharmacy and improving safety in middle-aged and older adults with HIV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40665043What 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.