No abstract

BackgroundOlder people use increasingly complex medication regimens. Complex regimens are challenging to administer, particularly for those with cognitive impairment, frailty, poor eyesight or limited dexterity. Complex regimens have been linked to non-adherence, medication errors and hospital admissions. ClinicalStrategies to simplify complex medication regimens

Neurological and psychiatric (mental health) disorders have a large impact on health burden globally. Cognitive disorders (including dementia) and stroke are leading causes of disability. Mental health disorders, including depression, contribute up to one-third of total years lived with disability. The Neurological and mental health Global Epidemiology Network (NeuroGEN) is an international multi-database network that harnesses administrative and electronic medical records from Australia, Asia, Europe and North America. Using these databases NeuroGEN will investigate medication use and health outcomes in neurological and mental health disorders. A key objective of NeuroGEN is to facilitate high-quality observational studies to address evidence-practice gaps where randomized controlled trials do not provide sufficient information on medication benefits and risks that is specific to vulnerable population groups. International multi-database research facilitates comparisons across geographical areas and jurisdictions, increases statistical power to investigate small subpopulations or rare outcomes, permits early post-approval assessment of safety and effectiveness, and increases generalisability of results. Through bringing together international researchers in pharmacoepidemiology, NeuroGEN has the potential to be paradigmchanging for observational research to inform evidence-based prescribing. The first focus of NeuroGEN will be to address evidence-gaps in the treatment of chronic comorbidities in people with dementia.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Therapeutic reasoning is when the purpose, task, or goal for engaging in reasoning is to determine the patient’s management plan. As the field’s understanding of the process of therapeutic reasoning is less well understood, we focused on studies that collected data on the process of therapeutic reasoning. To synthesize previous studies of therapeutic reasoning characteristics, methodological approaches, theoretical underpinnings, and results. We conducted a scoping review with systematic searching for English language articles with no date limits. Databases included MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Embase, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and ERIC. Search terms captured therapeutic reasoning in health professions education research. Initial search yielded 5450 articles. The title and abstract screening yielded 180 articles. After full-text review, 87 studies were included in this review. Articles were excluded if they were outside health professions education, did not collect data on the process of therapeutic reasoning, were not empirical studies, or not focused on therapeutic reasoning. We analyzed the included articles according to scoping questions using qualitative content analysis. 87 articles dated from 1987 to 2019 were included. Several study designs were employed including think-aloud protocol, interview and written documentation. More than half of the articles analyzed the data using qualitative coding. Authors often utilized several middle-range theories to explain therapeutic reasoning processes. The hypothetico-deductive model was most frequently mentioned. The included articles rarely built off the results from previous studies. Six key result categories were found: identifying themes, characterizing and testing previous local theory, exploring factors, developing new local theory, testing tools, and testing hypothesis. Despite the cast body of therapeutic reasoning research, individual study results remain isolated from previous studies. Our future recommendations include synthesizing pre-existing models, developing novel methodologies, and investigating other aspects of therapeutic reasoning.