A Theoretical Approach to Medication Adherence for Children and Youth with Psychiatric Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a theoretical review of treatment adherence for children and youth with psychiatric disorders where pharmacological agents are first-line interventions. Four empirically based models of health behavior are reviewed and applied to the sparse literature about medication adherence for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and young people with first-episode psychosis. Three qualitative studies of medication use are summarized, and details from the first-person narratives are used to illustrate the theoretical models. These studies indicate, when taken together, that the clinical approach to addressing poor medication adherence in children and youth with psychiatric disorders should be guided by more than one theoretical model. Mental health experts should clarify beliefs, address misconceptions, and support exploration of alternative treatment options unless contraindicated. Recognizing the larger context of the family, allowing time for parents and children to change their attitudes, and offering opportunities for easy access to medication in the future are important ways of respecting patient preferences, while steering them toward best-evidence interventions. Future research using qualitative methods of inquiry to investigate parent, child, and youth experiences of mental health interventions should identify effective ways to improve treatment adherence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".