Adherence to antimuscarinics in children with overactive bladder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Adherence to antimuscarinics for the treatment of overactive bladder is known to be low in adults but there is scarce data on adherence in paediatric patients. Our objectives were to evaluate the adherence of children to antimuscarinics and to identify influencing factors. METHODS: Children aged 5 to 18 years and treated with an antimuscarinic agent for at least 6 months were recruited at a routine visit and had to fill out a questionnaire. Their pharmacists were then contacted to inquire about prescription renewals since the beginning of treatment. The medication possession ratio was calculated and grouped by time blocks of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The pharmacists were contacted again 6 months after the recruitment visit. A medication possession ratio ≥ 80% was considered as good adherence. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were recruited with a mean age of 10.1 years. The self-reported adherence was 93%. Prior to the questionnaire, the medication possession ratio was ≥ 80% in 36%, 57%, 64% and 74% of cases in blocks of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. After the questionnaire, the medication possession ratio improved to 53%, 65% and 71% for blocks of 1, 3 and 6 months, respectively. No influencing factors were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Measured adherence to antimuscarinics in children with overactive bladder is higher than in adults but significantly lower than the self-reported adherence. Good self-reported adherence must be questioned to avoid unnecessary dose escalation or change of medication. Strategies to increase medication adherence are required to improve treatment efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".