ArticleDrugs & aging2026
Creating Awareness of preScribing Cascades and Managing Adverse Drug Effects (CASC-ADE) Tool: Appraisal by Future End Users.
Article in Drugs & aging, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite increasing attention for prescribing cascades, healthcare providers (HCP) need tools for taking action. We developed a tool, comprising fact sheets that summarise background information and provide guidance for recognising, managing, and preventing specific prescribing cascades. The aim of this study was to explore end users' appraisal of the initial version of this 'Creating Awareness of prescribing Cascades and managing Adverse Drug Effects' (CASC-ADE) tool.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire including 15 items (13 scored on 7-point Likert scales, 2 on a 7-point bipolar scale, with a score of 4 being adequate), covering four domains: purpose, rigour, usability, and usefulness. The questionnaire, alongside at least one fact sheet, was sent to a convenience sample of HCPs, medical and pharmacy students. Suggestions for improvement could be made by respondents. Descriptive statistics were evaluated separately for HCPs and students.
resultsThe study included 17 HCPs (9 pharmacists, 8 clinicians) and 12 students (6 pharmacy, 6 medical). All items received positive median scores: Likert scale items between 5 and 7 for HCPs and 5 and 6 for students, and bipolar scale items 4 for HCPs and 4-4.5 for students. Highest scores were seen for purpose, usability, and usefulness for recognising prescribing cascades (median 6-7). Usefulness for managing and preventing prescribing cascades received slightly lower scores (median 5-6). Fifteen HCPs and nine students were positive about using the tool in practice but some mentioned this would depend on its practical implementation. A few respondents suggested including more specific guidance for taking action.
conclusionsThe initial CASC-ADE tool was positively appraised across the assessed domains by the HCPs and students. Further research is needed to assess whether its use will improve recognition, management and prevention of prescribing cascades.
Identifiers
42714823What 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.