↓ Skip to main content

Anticholinergic burden quantified by anticholinergic risk scales and adverse outcomes in older people: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
41 X users
wikipedia
11 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
376 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
348 Mendeley
Title
Anticholinergic burden quantified by anticholinergic risk scales and adverse outcomes in older people: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0029-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohammed Saji Salahudeen, Stephen B Duffull, Prasad S Nishtala

Abstract

The cumulative effect of taking multiple medicines with anticholinergic properties termed as anticholinergic burden can adversely impact cognition, physical function and increase the risk of mortality. Expert opinion derived risk scales are routinely used in research and clinical practice to quantify anticholinergic burden. These scales rank the anticholinergic activity of medicines into four categories, ranging from no anticholinergic activity (= 0) to definite/high anticholinergic activity (= 3). The aim of this systematic review was to compare anticholinergic burden quantified by the anticholinergic risk scales and evaluate associations with adverse outcomes in older people. We conducted a literature search in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from 1984-2014 to identify expert opinion derived anticholinergic risk scales. In addition to this, a citation analysis was performed in Web of Science and Google Scholar to track prospective citing of references of selected articles for assessment of individual scales for adverse anticholinergic outcomes. The primary outcomes of interest were functional and cognitive outcomes associated with anticholinergic burden in older people. The critical appraisals of the included studies were performed by two independent reviewers and the data were extracted onto standardised forms. The primary electronic literature search identified a total of 1250 records in the 3 different databases. On the basis of full-text analysis, we identified 7 expert-based anticholinergic rating scales that met the inclusion criteria. The rating of anticholinergic activity for medicines among these rating scales was inconsistent. For example, quetiapine was rated as having high anticholinergic activity in one scale (n = 1), moderate in another scale (n = 1) and low in two other scales (n = 2). Citation analysis of the individual scales showed that the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale was the most frequently validated expert based anticholinergic scale for adverse outcomes (N = 13). In conclusion, there is not one standardised tool for measuring anticholinergic burden. Cohort studies have shown that higher anticholinergic burden is associated with negative brain effects, poorer cognitive and functional outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 348 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 346 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 14%
Researcher 41 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 11%
Other 33 9%
Student > Bachelor 29 8%
Other 74 21%
Unknown 86 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 115 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 58 17%
Psychology 16 5%
Neuroscience 13 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 3%
Other 24 7%
Unknown 110 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,105,205
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#179
of 3,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,673
of 278,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#3
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,715 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,565 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.