↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations to support deprescribing medications late in life

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Recommendations to support deprescribing medications late in life
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11096-015-0148-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Todd, Holly M. Holmes

Abstract

It is widely acknowledged that patients-particularly those late in life-are frequently exposed to the harms of medication. To minimize these harms, several frameworks have been developed by which prescribing can be optimized. In the context of diminishing life expectancy, these frameworks can be used to reduce medications that are no longer necessary, but appear to fall short of actual guidelines that incorporate a consideration of stopping medications. In this commentary, we present recommendations that could be incorporated into prescribing processes for all healthcare professionals and, ultimately, used to support the rationalization or deprescribing of medication in diminished life expectancy. We frame these recommendations in the same context as guidance for the initiation and discontinuation of implantable cardiac devices and argue that the two processes-with regards to decision-making-should be the same. We present our recommendations with preventive medication use in mind, and use statin therapy as an illustrative example.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 69 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 17 24%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,946,006
of 24,257,370 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#132
of 1,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,730
of 243,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,257,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,203 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 243,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.