↓ Skip to main content

Perspective: The Challenge of Clinical Decision-Making for Drug Treatment in Older People. The Role of Multidimensional Assessment and Prognosis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perspective: The Challenge of Clinical Decision-Making for Drug Treatment in Older People. The Role of Multidimensional Assessment and Prognosis
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2014.00061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Pilotto, Daniele Sancarlo, Julia Daragjati, Francesco Panza

Abstract

A complex decision path with a careful evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio is mandatory for drug treatment in advanced age. Enrollment biases in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) cause an under-representation of older individuals. In high-risk frail older subjects, the lack of RCTs makes clinical decision-making particularly difficult. Frail individuals are markedly susceptible to adverse drug reactions, and frailty may result in reduced treatment efficacy. Life expectancy should be included in clinical decision-making paths to better assess the benefits and risks of different drug treatments in advanced age. We performed a scoping review of principal hospital- and community-based prognostic indices in older age. Mortality prognostic tools could help clinical decision-making in diagnostics and therapeutics, tailoring appropriate intervention for older patients. The effectiveness of drug treatments may be significantly different in older patients with different risk of mortality. Clinicians need to consider the prognostic information obtained through well-validated, accurate, and calibrated predictive tools to identify those patients who may benefit from drug treatments given with the aim of increasing survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 40%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 10%
Psychology 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,139,815
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#1,579
of 5,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,169
of 353,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#6
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 353,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.