The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Led Medication Assessment Used to Identify Prevalence of and Associations With Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use Among Ambulatory Senior Adults With Cancer
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: The use of multiple and/or inappropriate medications in seniors is a significant public health problem, and cancer treatment escalates its prevalence and complexity. Existing studies are limited by patient self-report and medical record extraction compared with a pharmacist-led comprehensive medication assessment. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively examined medication use in ambulatory senior adults with cancer to determine the prevalence of polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use and associated factors. PP was defined as concurrent use of five or more and less than 10 medications, and excessive polypharmacy (EPP) was defined as 10 or more medications. PIMs were categorized by 2012 Beers Criteria, Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP), and the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS). Results: A total of 248 patients received a geriatric oncology assessment between January 2011 and June 2013 (mean age was 79.9 years, 64% were women, 74% were white, and 87% had solid tumors). Only 234 patients (evaluated by pharmacists) were included in the final analysis. Mean number of medications used was 9.23. The prevalence of PP, EPP, and PIM use was 41% (n = 96), 43% (n = 101), and 51% (n = 119), respectively. 2012 Beers, STOPP, and HEDIS criteria classified 173 occurrences of PIMs, which were present in 40%, 38%, and 21% of patients, respectively. Associations with PIM use were PP (P < .001) and increased comorbidities (P = .005). Conclusion: A pharmacist-led comprehensive medication assessment demonstrated a high prevalence of PP, EPP, and PIM use. Medication assessments that integrate both 2012 Beers and STOPP criteria and consider cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and cancer-related therapy are needed to optimize medication use in this population.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The American Geriatrics Society 2012 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel (2012) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.03923.x · Cited by 2,578
Gallagher, P., & O'Mahony, D. (2008) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afn197 · Cited by 697
Cited by
Mohile, S. G., Dale, W., Somerfield, M. R., Schonberg, M. A., Boyd, C. M., Burhenn, P. S., Canin, B., Cohen, H. J., Holmes, H. M., Hopkins, J. O., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2018.78.8687 · Cited by 1,479
Kadambi, S., Loh, K. P., Dunne, R., Magnuson, A., Maggiore, R., Zittel, J., Flannery, M., Inglis, J., Gilmore, N., Mohamed, M., et al. (2020) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-020-0421-z · Cited by 149
Trevino, K. M., Stern, A., Hershkowitz, R., Kim, S. Y., Li, Y., Lachs, M., & Prigerson, H. G. (2021) · Palliative and Supportive Care · doi:10.1017/s1478951521000286 · Cited by 23
“In addition to this dyadic effect, MAC was associated with greater reductions in anxiety in OACs and caregivers, respectively relative to usual care.”
BackgroundInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Nightingale, G., Hajjar, E., Swartz, K., Andrel-Sendecki, J., & Chapman, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2015-05-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 1453-1459
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2142503919
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 14.59
- 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: Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Led Medication Assessment Used to Identify Prevalence of and Associations With Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use Among Ambulatory Senior Adults With Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2014.58.7550
- The paper
- Nightingale, G., Hajjar, E., Swartz, K., Andrel-Sendecki, J., & Chapman, A. (2015). Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Led Medication Assessment Used to Identify Prevalence of and Associations With Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use Among Ambulatory Senior Adults With Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2014.58.7550
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.
