ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Patterns and appropriateness of antipsychotic prescribing in community-dwelling older adults: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antipsychotics carry substantial risk in older adults, yet their use among community-dwelling outpatients remains insufficiently characterized in Saudi Arabia, where most prior work examined potentially inappropriate medications broadly or within psychiatric services. This study assessed patterns and appropriateness of antipsychotic prescribing and examined factors associated with prescribing without a documented qualifying indication among community-dwelling older adults across outpatient specialties. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of patients aged 65 or older with a qualifying outpatient antipsychotic dispensing at King Fahad Hospital of the University, Saudi Arabia, from January 2019 to May 2023. The index date was the first qualifying antipsychotic dispensing. A criteria-based algorithm classified each patient's prescribing appropriateness using FDA-approved indications, American Psychiatric Association guidelines, and the 2023 AGS Beers Criteria. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with prescribing without a documented qualifying indication. Results: Among 394 patients, clearly appropriate prescribing was identified in 16.0%, while dementia- or delirium-related prescribing was classified as high-risk/context-dependent in 18.8%. Documented off-label prescribing was identified in 11.2%, 48.0% had no documented qualifying indication, and 6.1% had no diagnosis recorded within the ascertainment window. The latter group was excluded from comparative analyses. In the regression sample (n = 370), prescribing without a documented qualifying indication was more likely when the index antipsychotic was prescribed by medical or primary care (AOR 4.43, 95% CI 2.00 to 9.81; p < 0.001), neurology (AOR 2.42, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.63; p = 0.007), or other departments (AOR 3.16, 95% CI 1.16 to 8.63; p = 0.025) than by psychiatry. Conclusion: Prescribing without a documented qualifying indication was common outside psychiatry, but the absence of a qualifying diagnosis in the records does not confirm inappropriate prescribing. Systematic indication documentation, medication review, and targeted stewardship may improve prescribing quality in older adults.
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.