Deprescribing recommendation characteristics
Direction of deprescribing recommendations (n=316) | |
For deprescribing* | 288 (91%) |
Against deprescribing† | 28 (9%) |
Readability score‡ of deprescribing recommendations (n=316) | |
Mean (SD) | 17.3 (3.54) |
Complexity score§ of deprescribing recommendations (n=316) | |
Mean (SD) | 40.7 (10.85) |
Evidence-based recommendation (EBR) or good practice statements (GPS) (n=316) | |
EBR | 248 (78%) |
GPS | 68 (22%) |
Strength of EBRs (n=248) | |
Strong¶ | 41 (17%) |
Weak or conditional** | 77 (31%) |
Consensus | 17 (7%) |
Not specified | 113 (46%) |
Certainty of evidence for EBRs (n=248) | |
High | 5 (2%) |
Moderate | 25 (10%) |
Low | 32 (13%) |
Very low | 43 (17%) |
No evidence | 1 (0.4%) |
Not specified | 142 (57%) |
*Recommendations about for Who, What, When, How or Why to deprescribe were considered For deprescribing.
†Recommendations advising on when not to deprescribe were considered Against deprescribing.
‡A lower grade reading score means the text is easier to read. Grade 8 or lower is appropriate for most audiences.
§A lower complexity score means the text is easier to read. Higher complexity suggests a higher use of words that are uncommon in English.
¶Strong recommendations suggest that all or almost all persons would choose that intervention.43
**Conditional/weak recommendations imply that there is likely to be an important variation in the decision that informed persons are likely to make.43