MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166754635 · doi:10.1345/aph.1d252

Measurement, Correlates, and Health Outcomes of Medication Adherence Among Seniors

2004· review· en· W2166754635 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

VenueAnnals of Pharmacotherapy · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health EconomicsShell (Canada)South Health CampusUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedication adherenceGerontologyMEDLINEFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the measurement, correlates, and health outcomes of medication adherence among community-dwelling older adults. DATA SOURCES: Searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases for English-language literature (1966-December 2002) were conducted using one or more of the following terms: elderly, adherence/nonadherence, compliance/noncompliance, medication/drug, methodology/measurement, and hospitalization. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: From the above search, studies of medication adherence in community-dwelling seniors were selected for review along with relevant publications from the reference lists of articles identified in the initial database search. DATA SYNTHESIS: Although several methods are available for the assessment of adherence, accurate measurement continues to be difficult. The available evidence suggests that polypharmacy and poor patient-healthcare provider relationships (including the use of multiple providers) may be major determinants of nonadherence among older persons, with the impact of most sociodemographic factors being negligible. There is little consensus regarding other determinants of nonadherence. Relatively few high-quality investigations have examined the associations between nonadherence and subsequent health outcomes. Available data provide some support for increased health risks with nonadherence. However, interventions to improve adherence have seldom demonstrated positive effects on health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There are few empirical data to support a simple systematic descriptor of the nonadherent patient. The inconsistencies across studies may be attributable, in part, to the inherent difficulties involved in the measurement of a behavioral risk factor such as nonadherence. Future research in this area would be strengthened by incorporation of detailed assessments of patient-reported reasons for nonadherence, the appropriateness of drug regimens, and the effect of nonadherence on health outcomes.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.340
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.166 · 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