MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1547375638 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000011

Interventions for helping patients to follow prescriptions for medications

2002· review· en· W1547375638 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsHamilton General HospitalMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionCINAHLMedical prescriptionMEDLINERandomized controlled trialCochrane LibraryAlternative medicineAdverse effectFamily medicineIntervention (counseling)Clinical trialMeta-analysisPsycINFOPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Efforts to assist patients with adherence to prescribed, self-administered medications might improve the benefits and efficiency of health care. OBJECTIVE: To update an ongoing review summarising the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to help patients follow prescriptions for medications, focusing on trials that measured both adherence and clinical outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: Computerised searches to July 1998 in MEDLINE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), PsychInfo, Sociofile, and HSTAR; bibliographies in articles on patient adherence; articles in the reviewers' personal collections; and contact with authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were selected if they reported an unconfounded RCT of an intervention to improve adherence with prescribed medications, measuring both medication adherence and treatment outcome, with at least 80% follow-up of each group studied and, for long-term treatments, at least six months follow-up for studies with positive initial findings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information on study design features, interventions and controls, and findings were extracted by one reviewer (PM) and a research assistant and confirmed by two of the other reviewers. The studies were too disparate to warrant meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: For short-term treatments, one study, of counselling and written information, showed an effect on adherence and clinical outcome. Ten of 19 interventions for long-term treatments reported in 17 RCTs were associated with improvements in adherence, but only nine interventions led to improvements in treatment outcomes. Almost all of the interventions that were effective for long-term care were complex, including combinations of more convenient care, information, counselling, reminders, self-monitoring, reinforcement, family therapy, and other forms of additional supervision or attention. Even the most effective interventions did not lead to large improvements in adherence and treatment outcomes. Two studies showed that telling patients about adverse effects of treatment did not affect their adherence. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The full benefits of medications cannot be realised at currently achievable levels of adherence. Current methods of improving adherence for chronic health problems are mostly complex and not very effective. More studies of innovative approaches to assist patients to follow medication prescriptions are needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.293
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.154 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations911
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207