ArticleBasic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology2025
Tools for Evaluating Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults: A Scoping Review Assessing Suitability for Register-Based Research.
Article in Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology, 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.
- Tools for Evaluating Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults: A Scoping Review Assessing Suitability for Register-Based Research.Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review provides an overview of tools used to assess potentially inappropriate prescribing among older adults and discusses their suitability for register-based research. We performed a systematic search using PubMed (March 2024), retrieving 5493 records. Studies were included if they evaluated potentially inappropriate medication use among older adults with a mean or median age of ≥ 65 years. Identified tools were described by characteristics, usage frequency, and applicability to register-based research by identifying required data types. A total of 419 studies were included, using 44 different tools, including multiple versions. Beers criteria and the Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions were most often used (50% and 19%, respectively). Ten tools were used in five or more studies, each differing in structure, particularly regarding the clinical information required. The European list of potentially inappropriate medications, the PRISCUS list, the Zhan criteria, and the Norwegian General Practice criteria do not require clinical data on medical history, symptoms, laboratory tests or other parameters, making them particularly useful for register-based research. Specific segments of other tools can also be applied effectively. To generate valid and meaningful results, the availability of required data is a crucial consideration for researchers when selecting the most appropriate tool.
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.