ReviewDrug, healthcare and patient safety2025
Current Status and Research Trends in Deprescribing: A Bibliometric Review.
Review in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 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.
- Instruments for assessing healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding deprescribing: a scoping review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Polypharmacy has emerged as a major global public health concern. To mitigate its adverse effects, deprescribing has been introduced and integrated into clinical practice. This study aims to analyze the current research landscape and identify emerging trends in deprescribing from a bibliometric perspective. Methods: Relevant studies on deprescribing published prior to December 2024 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Bibliometric analysis and visualization of co-authorship, citation, co-citation, co-occurrence, and burst detection were performed using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Bibliometrix. Results: A total of 1809 publications were identified, with a marked increase over the past decade. The field is dominated by contributions from developed countries, notably the United States, Australia, and Canada. Studies primarily focus on chronic conditions, such as psychiatric disorders, cardiometabolic diseases, and chronic pain, and the medications used to treat them. Influential publications highlighted barriers and facilitators of deprescribing, deprescribing tools, and deprescribing interventions and their associated outcomes. Burst detection analysis pointed to increasing attention on pharmaceutical care and implementation science. Conclusion: This study presents the first comprehensive bibliometric overview of deprescribing. The findings demonstrate that the field has grown rapidly but remains dominated by developed countries and a limited set of chronic diseases. The integration of implementation science frameworks emerges as a promising approach to enhance the design and evaluation of deprescribing interventions. Future studies should broaden their scope to include a wider range of diseases and medications, and encourage greater participation from developing countries.
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.