ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2025
Awareness and Implementation of the Age-Friendly 4Ms Framework: A Needs Assessment Survey.
Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2025. 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.
- Awareness and Implementation of the Age-Friendly 4Ms Framework: A Needs Assessment Survey.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 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
Abstract
backgroundThe Age-Friendly Health Systems (AFHS) initiative, focusing on the 4Ms-"What Matters," "Medication," "Mentation," and "Mobility," aims to provide high quality care to adults aged 65 and older. Pharmacists are well-positioned to champion the 4Ms within collaborative, interprofessional care teams. Yet, little is known about pharmacists' awareness of and comfort with the 4Ms.
methodsA needs assessment survey was distributed to American Society of Consultant Pharmacists members to evaluate their familiarity with the 4Ms framework and comfort in assessing and acting on the 4Ms. The survey included 38 items across three sections: participant characteristics, familiarity with AFHS initiative, and comfort with the 4Ms. Comfort was rated on a five-point Likert scale, with scores of 4-5 categorized as comfortable and 1-3 as not/less comfortable. Participants were considered comfortable with a specific 4M domain if they scored 4 or 5 on all related items.
resultsThe survey had a view rate of 11.3% and a viewer participation rate of 58.3%. Of 232 respondents, 44.0% chose consultant pharmacist for their primary professional role, and 51.7% practiced in post-acute, long-term, and residential care settings. Most (62.1%) respondents were aware of the AFHS initiative, but just 20% reported facility-level involvement. Comfort in assessing each of the 4Ms varied: "Medication" (73.3%), "What Matters" (71.1%), "Mobility" (28.9%) and "Mentation" (27.2%). Only 17.7% of respondents were comfortable assessing the set of 4Ms. Although 81% of respondents routinely assessed high-risk medications, 71.6% were confident in deprescribing them. A sizable percentage had never assessed "Mobility" (61.2%) or "Mentation" (46.5% for depression; 53.0% for dementia).
conclusionsFindings underscore the need for targeted education and training to enhance pharmacists' comfort in assessing "Mobility" and "Mentation," improve skills in medication optimization, and promote integration of the set of 4Ms as a cohesive approach to person-centered care.
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.