IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0124247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review of Medication Exposure Assessment in Prospective Cohort Studies of Community Dwelling Older Australians

Author

Listed:
  • Susan G Poole
  • J Simon Bell
  • Natali Jokanovic
  • Carl M Kirkpatrick
  • Michael J Dooley

Abstract

Introduction: It is not known to what extent medication use has been comprehensively assessed in prospective cohort studies of older Australians. Understanding the varying methods to assess medication use is necessary to establish comparability and to understand the opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological analysis. The objective of this review was to compare and contrast how medication-related data have been collected in prospective cohorts of community-dwelling older Australians. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE (1990–2014) were systematically searched to identify prospective cohorts of ≥1000 older participants that commenced recruitment after 1990. The data collection tools used to assess medication use in each cohort were independently examined by two investigators using a structured approach. Results: Thirteen eligible cohorts were included. Baseline medication use was assessed in participant self-completed surveys (n = 3), by an investigator inspecting medications brought to a clinic interview (n = 7), and by interviewing participants in their home (n = 3). Five cohorts sought participant consent to access administrative claims data. Six cohorts used multiple methods to assess medication use across one or more study waves. All cohorts assessed medication use at baseline and 12 cohorts in follow-up waves. Twelve cohorts recorded prescription medications by trade or generic name; 12 cohorts recorded medication strength; and 9 recorded the daily medication dose in at least one wave of the cohort. Seven cohorts asked participants about their “current” medication use without providing a definition of “current”; and nine cohorts asked participants to report medication use over recall periods ranging from 1-week to 3-months in at least one wave of the cohort. Sixty-five original publications, that reported the prevalence or outcomes of medication use, in the 13 cohorts were identified (median = 3, range 1–21). Conclusion: There has been considerable variability in the assessment of medication use within and between cohorts. This may limit the comparability of medication data collected in these cohorts.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan G Poole & J Simon Bell & Natali Jokanovic & Carl M Kirkpatrick & Michael J Dooley, 2015. "A Systematic Review of Medication Exposure Assessment in Prospective Cohort Studies of Community Dwelling Older Australians," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0124247
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0124247
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0124247&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0124247?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0124247. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.