Additional file 1: Table S1. of Disability in long-term care residents explained by prevalent geriatric syndromes, not long-term care home characteristics: a cross-sectional study

(Disablement Process Model definitions and examples); Table S2. (Items and Possible Responses in the RAI-MDS ADL Long Form Scale); Table S3. (Chronic Conditions and Diagnostic Criteria Used to Identify them in Claims and Health Assessment Databases); Table S4. (Geriatric Syndromes and Diagnostic Criteria Used to Identify them in the CCRS Database); Table S5. (All Variable Coefficient Estimates from Models 1 and 2); Table S6. (Model 1 Excluding Chronic Conditions, Geriatric Syndromes); Table S7. (All Variable Coefficient Estimates from Stratified Versions of Model 1); Table S8. (Sensitivity of Model 1 Findings to Unmeasured LTCH Variables and Lack of adjustment for Long-Term Care Homes); Table S9. (Sensitivity of Model 1 Findings to Coding of Chronic Conditions); Table S10. (Sensitivity of Model 2 Findings to Exclusion of Admission Assessments). (DOCX 87 kb

Additional file 1: of Comparing clinician descriptions of frailty and geriatric syndromes using electronic health records: a retrospective cohort study

Sample phrases, NLP methods, and additional results. (DOCX 36 kb

Expected number of events without and with aspirin prevention in men and women.

<p>*All-cause mortality is considered as a competing risk.</p><p>^{<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127194#t003fn001" target="_blank">*</a>}</p

Weights used in the first sensitivity analysis, based on 5-year survival.

<p>Weights used in the first sensitivity analysis, based on 5-year survival.</p

Data for benefit-harm assessment.

<p>* No reliable data was available from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study for men in age category 75–84 years. To estimate the incidence rate we assumed a 50 percent increase from age category 65–74 years based on similar increases in incidences in age category 65–74 to 75–84 in the Framingham Heart Study and the Cardiovascular Health Study.</p><p>Treatment effects and outcome risks.</p

Benefit-harms comparison index for primary prevention of cardiovascular events and cancer with low dose aspirin over 10 years per 1,000 persons (95% CI and probability that index is positive based on recalculating the index in simulations).

<p>¹Positive values = aspirin beneficial; Negative values = aspirin harmful</p><p>Benefit-harms comparison index for primary prevention of cardiovascular events and cancer with low dose aspirin over 10 years per 1,000 persons (95% CI and probability that index is positive based on recalculating the index in simulations).</p

The prevalence of clinically-relevant comorbid conditions in patients with physician-diagnosed COPD: a cross-sectional study using data from NHANES 1999–2008

Background: Treatment of chronic diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is complicated by the presence of comorbidities. The objective of this analysis was to estimate the prevalence of comorbidity in COPD using nationally-representative data. Methods: This study draws from a multi-year analytic sample of 14,828 subjects aged 45+, including 995 with COPD, from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 1999-2008. COPD was defined by self-reported physician diagnosis of chronic bronchitis or emphysema; patients who reported a diagnosis of asthma were excluded. Using population weights, we estimated the age-and-gender-stratified prevalence of 22 comorbid conditions that may influence COPD and its treatment. Results: Subjects 45+ with physician-diagnosed COPD were more likely than subjects without physician-diagnosed COPD to have coexisting arthritis (54.6% vs. 36.9%), depression (20.6% vs. 12.5%), osteoporosis (16.9% vs. 8.5%), cancer (16.5% vs. 9.9%), coronary heart disease (12.7% vs. 6.1%), congestive heart failure (12.1% vs. 3.9%), and stroke (8.9% vs. 4.6%). Subjects with COPD were also more likely to report mobility difficulty (55.6% vs. 32.5%), use of >4 prescription medications (51.8% vs. 32.1), dizziness/balance problems (41.1% vs. 23.8%), urinary incontinence (34.9% vs. 27.3%), memory problems (18.5% vs. 8.8%), low glomerular filtration rate (16.2% vs. 10.5%), and visual impairment (14.0% vs. 9.6%). All reported comparisons have p<0.05. Conclusions: Our study indicates that COPD management may need to take into account a complex spectrum of comorbidities. This work identifies which conditions are most common in a nationally-representative set of COPD patients (physician-diagnosed), a necessary step for setting research priorities and developing clinical practice guidelines that address COPD within the context of comorbidity

Additional file 1: of Incorporating prognosis in the care of older adults with multimorbidity: description and evaluation of a novel curriculum

Incorporating Prognosis in the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity - Prognostic Resources. (DOCX 834 kb

Reducing potentially inappropriate polypharmacy at a national and international level: the impact of deprescribing networks

Introduction: Over the past decade, polypharmacy has increased dramatically. Measurable harms include falls, fractures, cognitive impairment, and death. The associated costs are massive and contribute substantially to low-value health care. Deprescribing is a promising solution, but there are barriers. Establishing a network to address polypharmacy can help overcome barriers by connecting individuals with an interest and expertise in deprescribing and can act as an important source of motivation and resources. Areas covered: Over the past decade, several deprescribing networks were launched to help tackle polypharmacy, with evidence of individual and collective impact. A network approach has several advantages; it can spark interest, ideas and enthusiasm through information sharing, meetings and conversations with the public, providers, and other key stakeholders. In this special report, the details of how four deprescribing networks were established across the globe are detailed. Expert opinion: Networks create links between people who lead existing and/or budding deprescribing practices and policy initiatives, can influence people with a shared passion for deprescribing, and facilitate sharing of intellectual capital and tools to take initiatives further and strengthen impact.This report should inspire others to establish their own deprescribing networks, a critical step in accelerating a global deprescribing movement.</p