ArticleBMJ open2026
Study protocol for a hybrid I randomised clinical trial to evaluate an audit and feedback and a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce potentially inappropriate medications in older adults: the AIM study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPotentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in older adults, such as long-term use of benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors without indication or antipsychotics in dementia, are associated with adverse events and increased healthcare utilisation. Despite clinical guidelines discouraging their use, PIPs remain frequent in primary care. An audit and feedback (A&F) intervention of PIPs to general practitioners (GPs), led by pharmacists, may reduce the prescription of PIPs in primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-arm, pragmatic, controlled trial will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of an A&F-based intervention and a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce the proportion of patients aged ≥65 years receiving inappropriate prescriptions. A total of 170 participating GPs, 85 per group, are required. GPs will be randomised into intervention or control groups (1:1). The intervention includes feedback reports, pharmacist-led academic detailing and access to online training modules. The primary outcome is the proportion of older adults receiving at least one PIP at 12 months as well as the total number of PIPs. A random effects Tobit regression model, censored at 0 and 100, will be used to estimate between-group differences adjusted for baseline prescribing. Subgroup analyses will explore heterogeneity of effect by baseline prescribing level and healthcare region. Implementation outcomes, including reach, fidelity, engagement and maintenance, will be evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework, combining quantitative and qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained by the Balearic Island Committee Ethics (IB5219/23PI). Study findings, including primary and secondary outcomes and qualitative implementation results, will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and stakeholder reports. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14449434.
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.