↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2008
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
347 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
476 Mendeley
Title
Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2008
DOI 10.2147/cia.s2468
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reamer L Bushardt, Emily B Massey, Temple W Simpson, Jane C Ariail, Kit N Simpson

Abstract

The percentage of the population described as elderly is growing, and a higher prevalence of multiple, chronic disease states must be managed concurrently. Healthcare practitioners must appropriately use medication for multiple diseases and avoid risks often associated with multiple medication use such as adverse effects, drug/drug interactions, drug/disease interactions, and inappropriate dosing. The purpose of this study is to identify a consensus definition for polypharmacy and evaluate its prevalence among elderly outpatients. The authors also sought to identify or develop a clinical tool which would assist healthcare practitioners guard against inappropriate drug therapy in elderly patients. The most commonly cited definition was a medication not matching a diagnosis. Inappropriate was part of definitions used frequently. Some definitions placed a numeric value on concurrent medications. Two common definitions (ie, 6 or more medications or a potentially inappropriate medication) were used to evaluate polypharmacy in elderly South Carolinians (n = 1027). Data analysis demonstrates that a significant percentage of this population is prescribed six or more concomitant drugs and/or uses a potentially inappropriate medication. The findings are 29.4% are prescribed 6 or more concurrent drugs, 15.7% are prescribed one or more potentially inappropriate drugs, and 9.3% meet both definitions of polypharmacy used in this study. The authors recommend use of less ambiguous terminology such as hyperpharmacotherapy or multiple medication use. A structured approach to identify and manage inappropriate polypharmacy is suggested and a clinical tool is provided.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 476 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 469 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 81 17%
Student > Bachelor 61 13%
Researcher 56 12%
Student > Postgraduate 49 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 9%
Other 96 20%
Unknown 92 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 186 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 78 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 2%
Other 38 8%
Unknown 113 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 08 August 2020.
All research outputs
#799,344
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#64
of 1,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,611
of 98,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,980 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 98,907 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.