Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adverse drug reactions in elderly patients

Open access
Routledge, P. A., O'Mahony, M. S., Woodhouse, K. W.·2004·British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract

Many studies from around the world show a correlation between increasing age and adverse drug reaction (ADR) rate, at least for some medical conditions. More than 80% of ADRs causing admission or occurring in hospital are type A (dose‐related) in nature, and thus predictable from the known pharmacology of the drug and therefore potentially avoidable. Frail elderly patients appear to be particularly at risk of ADRs and this group is also likely to be receiving several medicines. The toxicity of some drug combinations may sometimes be synergistic and be greater than the sum of the risks of toxicity of either agent used alone. In order to recognize and to prevent ADRs (including drug interactions), good communication is crucial, and prescribers should develop an effective therapeutic partnership with the patient and with fellow health professionals. Undergraduate and postgraduate education in evidence‐based therapeutics is also vitally important. The use of computer‐based decision support systems (CDSS) and electronic prescribing should be encouraged, and when problems do occur, health professionals need to be aware of their professional responsibility to report suspected adverse drug events (ADEs) and ADRs. ‘Rational’ or ‘obligatory’ polypharmacy is becoming a legitimate practice as increasing numbers of individuals live longer and the range of available therapeutic options for many medical conditions increases. The clear risk of ADRs in this situation should be considered in the context that dose‐related failure of existing therapy to manage the condition adequately may be one of the most important reasons for admission of the elderly to hospital. Thus, age itself should not be used as a reason for withholding adequate doses of effective therapies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2003.01875.x

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 42 references

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
Routledge, P. A., O'Mahony, M. S., & Woodhouse, K. W.
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-08-29
Volume
57
Issue
2
Pages
121-126
ISSN
  • 0306-5251 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2125
OpenAlex
W1694280808
Cited by
476
References
42
FWCI
5.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2125.2003.01875.x
The paper
Routledge, P. A., O'Mahony, M. S., & Woodhouse, K. W. (2004). Adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2125.2003.01875.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.