MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998002405 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.04.022

Adherence Associated With Oral Medications in the Treatment of Spasticity

2013· article· en· W1998002405 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel Halpern, Patrick Gillard, Glenn D. Graham, Sepideh F. Varon, Richard D. Zorowitz

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsBoehringer Ingelheim (Canada)
FundersU.S. Food and Drug Administration
KeywordsTizanidineSpasticityMedicineBaclofenLogistic regressionDantroleneMuscle relaxantPopulationOdds ratioPhysical therapyPharmacySpinal cord injuryAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatrySpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine adherence to baclofen, tizanidine, and dantrolene (U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved oral spasticity medications), and identified determinants of adherence. DESIGN: A retrospective administrative claims data analysis that used medical and pharmacy claims data and enrollment information from a large, national U.S. health plan. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The subjects were commercial health plan members who initiated treatment on baclofen, tizanidine, or dantrolene from January 1, 2004, through September 30, 2009, and who had stroke, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, cerebral palsy, or multiple sclerosis. Descriptive and logistic regression statistical analyses were performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes were adherence, measured as continuous medication possession ratio (MPR) and as a binary indicator (MPR ≥0.80, adherent; MPR <0.80, nonadherent), change in oral spasticity medication, and use of nonoral spasticity therapy. RESULTS: The study population included 2840 subjects. Adherence overall was poor: the range of mean unadjusted MPR values was 0.10-0.50, which indicated that, at best, the subjects were adherent to their index spasticity medications for 50% of their treatment periods. Unadjusted overall MPRs for baclofen and tizanidine were 20.4% and 9.1%, respectively. Fewer than 5% of subjects changed oral spasticity medications. The results of logistic regression to identify determinants of adherence showed that subjects treated with tizanidine versus baclofen had 37.4% lower odds of adherence and that subjects with traumatic brain injury versus stroke had 77.5% lower odds of adherence. The odds of adherence increased with age and with preindex contracture or decubitus ulcer. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to oral spasticity medication was poor irrespective of index spasticity medication or condition. Results from this study indicated that physicians cannot assume that patients are adherent to prescribed oral spasticity medications. A more complete understanding of the reasons behind nonadherence is required.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207