Objectives Detection of dementia is essential for improving the lives of patients but the extent of underdetection worldwide and its causes are not known. This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of undetected dementia and to examine its correlates. Methods/setting/participants A systematic search was conducted until October 2016 for studies reporting the proportion of undetected dementia and/or its determinants in either the community or in residential care settings worldwide. Random-effects models calculated the pooled rate of undetected dementia and subgroup analyses were conducted to identify determinants of the variation. Primary and secondary outcome measures The outcome measures of interest were the prevalence and determinants of undetected dementia. Results 23 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. The pooled rate of undetected dementia was 61.7% (95% CI 55.0% to 68.0%). The rate of underdetection was higher in China and India (vs Europe and North America), in the community setting (vs residential/nursing care), age of <70 years, male gender and diagnosis by general practitioner. However, it was lower in the studies using Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) diagnosis criteria. Conclusions The prevalence of undetected dementia is high globally. Wide variations in detecting dementia need to be urgently examined, particularly in populations with low socioeconomic status. Efforts are required to reduce diagnostic inequality and to improve early diagnosis in the community.

The elevated risk of Parkinson’s disease in patients with diabetes might be mitigated depending on the type of drugs prescribed to treat diabetes. Population data for risk of Parkinson’s disease in users of the newer types of drugs used in diabetes are scarce. We compared the risk of Parkinson’s disease in patients with diabetes exposed to thiazolidinediones (glitazones), glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, with the risk of Parkinson’s disease of users of any other oral glucose lowering drugs. A population-based, longitudinal, cohort study was conducted using historic primary care data from The Health Improvement Network. Patients with a diagnosis of diabetes and a minimum of two prescriptions for diabetes medications between January 2006 and January 2019 were included in our study. The primary outcome was the first recording of a diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease after the index date, identified from clinical records. We compared the risk of Parkinson’s disease in individuals treated with glitazones or DPP4 inhibitors and/or GLP-1 receptor agonists to individuals treated with other antidiabetic agents using a Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting based on propensity scores. Results were analysed separately for insulin users. Among 100 288 patients [mean age 62.8 years (standard deviation 12.6)], 329 (0.3%) were diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease during the median follow-up of 3.33 years. The incidence of Parkinson’s disease was 8 per 10 000 person-years in 21 175 patients using glitazones, 5 per 10 000 person-years in 36 897 patients using DPP4 inhibitors and 4 per 10 000 person-years in 10 684 using GLP-1 mimetics, 6861 of whom were prescribed GTZ and/or DPP4 inhibitors prior to using GLP-1 mimetics. Compared with the incidence of Parkinson’s disease in the comparison group (10 per 10 000 person-years), adjusted results showed no evidence of any association between the use of glitazones and Parkinson’s disease [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76–1.63; P = 0.467], but there was strong evidence of an inverse association between use of DPP4 inhibitors and GLP-1 mimetics and the onset of Parkinson’s disease (IRR 0.64; 95% CI 0.43–0.88; P < 0.01 and IRR 0.38; 95% CI 0.17–0.60; P < 0.01, respectively). Results for insulin users were in the same direction, but the overall size of this group was small. The incidence of Parkinson’s disease in patients diagnosed with diabetes varies substantially depending on the treatment for diabetes received. The use of DPP4 inhibitors and/or GLP-1 mimetics is associated with a lower rate of Parkinson’s disease compared to the use of other oral antidiabetic drugs.

Objectives To investigate beliefs about medicines and their association with medicine adherence in patients with chronic diseases in China. Design A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study Setting Two large urban hospitals in Hefei and Tianjin, China Participants Hospital inpatients (313 stroke patients) and outpatients (315 diabetic patients and 339 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients) were recruited between January 2014 and September 2014. Outcome measures The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), assessing patients’ beliefs about the specific medicine (Specific-Necessity and Specific-Concerns) prescribed for their conditions (stroke/diabetes/RA) and more general background beliefs about pharmaceuticals as a class of treatment (BMQ-General Benefit, Harm and Overuse); the Perceived Sensitivity to Medicines scale (PSM) assessed patients’ beliefs about how sensitive they were to the effects of medicines and the Medication Adherence Report Scale. The association between non-adherence and beliefs about medicines was assessed using a logistic regression model. Results Patients with diabetes mellitus had a stronger perceived need for treatment (mean (SD) Specific-Necessity score, 3.75 (0.40)) than patients with stroke (3.69 (0.53)) and RA (3.66 (0.44)) (p=0.049). Moderate correlations were observed between Specific-Concerns and General-Overuse, General-Harm and PSM (Pearson correlation coefficients, 0.39, 0.49 and 0.49, respectively, p<0.01). Three hundred and eleven patients were non-adherent to their medicine (159 (51.0%) in the stroke group, 60 (26.7%) in the diabetes mellitus group and 62 (19.8%) in the RA group, p<0.01). Across the whole sample, after adjusting for demographic characteristics, non-adherence was associated with patients who had higher concerns about their medicines (OR, 1.35, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.71) and patients who believed that they were personally sensitive to the effects of medications (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.85). Conclusion The BMQ is a useful tool to identify patients at risk of non-adherence. In the future, adherence intervention studies may use the BMQ to screen for patients who are at risk of non-adherence and to map interventional support.

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a major cause of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality in patient care. While a substantial body of work has been undertaken to characterise ADRs in the hospital setting, the overall burden of ADRs in the primary care remains unclear. Objectives: To investigate the prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting and factors affecting the heterogeneity of the estimates. Methods: Studies were identified through searching of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and IPA databases. We included observational studies that reported information on the prevalence of ADRs in patients receiving primary care. Disease and treatment specific studies were excluded. Quality of the included studies were assessed using Smyth ADRs adapted scale. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimate. Potential source of heterogeneity, including age groups, ADRs definitions, ADRs detection methods, study setting, quality of the studies, and sample size, were investigated using sub-group analysis and meta-regression. Results: Thirty-three studies with a total study population of 1,568,164 individuals were included. The pooled prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting was 8.32% (95% CI, 7.82, 8.83). The percentage of preventable ADRs ranged from 12.35–37.96%, with the pooled estimate of 22.96% (95% CI, 7.82, 38.09). Cardiovascular system drugs were the most commonly implicated medication class. Methods of ADRs detection, age group, setting, and sample size contributed significantly to the heterogeneity of the estimates. Conclusion: ADRs constitute a significant health problem in the primary care setting. Further research should focus on examining whether ADRs affect subsequent clinical outcomes, particularly in high-risk therapeutic areas. This information may better inform strategies to reduce the burden of ADRs in the primary care setting.

How best to choose a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for atrial fibrillation is challenging, because head-to-head trial data comparing agents are unavailable. In this population-based cohort study... Visual Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Between Direct Oral Anticoagulants. How best to choose a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for atrial fibrillation is challenging, because head-t... Background: Current guidelines recommend using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but head-to-head trial data do not exist to guide the choi...

As of February 2023, there have been approximately 759 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 infections globally¹ and some individuals have experienced persistent symptoms, such as fatigue and shortness of breath, after recovering from the initial illness from COVID-19. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE),² the World Health Organization (WHO),³ and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)⁴ have published their definitions of post–COVID-19 condition (PCC) between December 2020 and October 2021, with some discrepancies between them. Despite the growing volume of research on lasting symptoms of COVID-19, the definition has not been universally agreed on. This study aimed to describe how post–COVID-19 condition has been defined to date in studies on this topic.