Validation of the Persian Version of the 8-Item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) in Iranian Hypertensive Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reliability and validity of the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) was assessed in a sample of Iranian hypertensive patients. In this multi-center study which lasted from August to October 2014, a total of 200 patients who were suffering from hypertension (HTN) and were taking anti-hypertensive medication(s) were included. The cases were accessed through private and university health centers in the cities of Tehran, Karaj, Kermanshah, and Bafgh in Iran and were interviewed face-to-face by the research team. The validated Persian translation of the MMAS-8 was provided by the owner of this scale. This scale contains 7 questions with "Yes" or "No" response choices and an additional Likert-type question (totally 8 questions). The total score ranges from 0 to 8 with higher scores reflecting better medication adherence. Mean (±SD) overall MMAS-8 score was 5.57 (±1.86). There were 108 (54%), 62 (31%), and 30 (15%) patients in the low, moderate, and high adherence groups. Internal consistency was acceptable with an overall Cronbach's ? coefficient of 0.697 and test-retest reliability showed good reproducibility (r= 0.940); P< 0.001. Overall score of the MMAS-8 was significantly correlated with systolic BP (r= - 0.306) and diastolic BP (r= - 0.279) with P< 0.001 for both BP measurements. The Chi-square test showed a significant relationship between adherence level and BP control (P= 0.016). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the scale were 92.8%, 22.3%, 52.9%, and 76.7%, respectively. The Persian version of the MMAS had acceptable reliability and validity in Iranian hypertensive patients. This scale can be used as a standard and reliable tool in future studies to determine medication adherence of Persian-speaking patients with chronic conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".