MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1952026112 · doi:10.13034/jsst.v8i1.46

A Novel Text-Message Reminder System to Address Medication Non-Adherence

2015· article· en· W1952026112 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Avinash Pandey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Science and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedication adherenceMedicineDiseasePsychological interventionInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a high rate of medication non-adherence, which can lead to disease progression, disability andmortality. This study tested a novel computer-based text message reminder system to improve adherence to medications. This system proved effective in improving adherence to a placebo in healthy volunteers, and to medications in cardiac patients over a two month period. It was especially effective in individuals at prospectively identified to be at high risk of non-adherence. This system represents a simple and scalable method to improve adherence to medications at a clinical or pharmaceutical level. Further research into the impact of repeated reminders is necessary to explore the impacts of text message reminders in other populations and in other lifestyle interventions.Il y a un taux élevé de non-adhérence aux médicaments, ce qui peut provoquer la progression de la maladie, des handicaps et même la mortalité. Cette étude a vérifier un système de rappel fonctionnant par messagerie texte afin d’améliorer l’adhérence aux médicaments. Ce système a été prouvé efficace dans l’amélioration de l’adhérence à un placébo chez des sujets bénévoles, et à des médicaments chez des patients cardiaques, sur une période de 2 mois. Il était particulièrement efficace chez es individus identifiés comme ayant un risqué élevé de non-adhérence. Ce système représente une méthode simple et mesurable utilisée pour améliorer l’adhérence aux médicaments à un niveau pharmaceutique ou clinique. Des recherches plus poussées sur les conséquences de ces rappels répétés sont nécessaires afin d’explorer les impacts des rappels texte chez d’autres populations et dans d’autres interventions concernant les habitudes de vie.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student Science and TechnologySame topicMedication Adherence and ComplianceFrench-language works237,207