Title |
Potentially inappropriate prescribing to the elderly: comparison of new protocol to Beers criteria with relation to hospitalizations for ADRs
|
---|---|
Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.1007/s00228-014-1648-3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Suzana Mimica Matanović, Vera Vlahović-Palčevski |
Abstract |
Screening tools for detecting potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) represent an important way to assess drug prescribing in the elderly. Recently, we introduced a new comprehensive tool to detect both PIMs and clinically important drug-drug interactions (DDI). The aim of the study was to assess the applicability of the new tool. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
Spain | 1 | 2% |
Ireland | 1 | 2% |
Brazil | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 61 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
Other | 9 | 14% |
Researcher | 8 | 12% |
Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
Other | 16 | 25% |
Unknown | 9 | 14% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 49% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 14% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 6% |
Unknown | 13 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 January 2014.
All research outputs
#15,291,764
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#2,043
of 2,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,976
of 306,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 306,092 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.