MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904346259 · doi:10.2196/12493

Technological Interventions for Medication Adherence in Adult Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review

2018· review· en· W2904346259 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jackson Steinkamp, Nathaniel Goldblatt, Jacob T. Borodovsky, Amy LaVertu, Ian M. Kronish, Lisa A. Marsch, Zev Schuman‐Olivier

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsycINFOMEDLINEMental healthMedicineSystematic reviewTelehealthmHealthIntervention (counseling)Mobile phoneData extractionTelepsychiatryTelemedicinePsychiatryHealth careComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Medication adherence is critical to the effectiveness of psychopharmacologic therapy. Psychiatric disorders present special adherence considerations, notably an altered capacity for decision making and the increased street value of controlled substances. A wide range of interventions designed to improve adherence in mental health and substance use disorders have been studied; recently, many have incorporated information technology (eg, mobile phone apps, electronic pill dispensers, and telehealth). Many intervention components have been studied across different disorders. Furthermore, many interventions incorporate multiple components, making it difficult to evaluate the effect of individual components in isolation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic scoping review to develop a literature-driven, transdiagnostic taxonomic framework of technology-based medication adherence intervention and measurement components used in mental health and substance use disorders. METHODS: This review was conducted based on a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42018067902) in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses systematic review guidelines. We searched 7 electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Engineering Village, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2000 to September 2018. Overall, 2 reviewers independently conducted title and abstract screens, full-text screens, and data extraction. We included all studies that evaluate populations or individuals with a mental health or substance use disorder and contain at least 1 technology-delivered component (eg, website, mobile phone app, biosensor, or algorithm) designed to improve medication adherence or the measurement thereof. Given the wide variety of studied interventions, populations, and outcomes, we did not conduct a risk of bias assessment or quantitative meta-analysis. We developed a taxonomic framework for intervention classification and applied it to multicomponent interventions across mental health disorders. RESULTS: The initial search identified 21,749 results; after screening, 127 included studies remained (Cohen kappa: 0.8, 95% CI 0.72-0.87). Major intervention component categories include reminders, support messages, social support engagement, care team contact capabilities, data feedback, psychoeducation, adherence-based psychotherapy, remote care delivery, secure medication storage, and contingency management. Adherence measurement components include self-reports, remote direct visualization, fully automated computer vision algorithms, biosensors, smart pill bottles, ingestible sensors, pill counts, and utilization measures. Intervention modalities include short messaging service, mobile phone apps, websites, and interactive voice response. We provide graphical representations of intervention component categories and an element-wise breakdown of multicomponent interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Many technology-based medication adherence and monitoring interventions have been studied across psychiatric disease contexts. Interventions that are useful in one psychiatric disorder may be useful in other disorders, and further research is necessary to elucidate the specific effects of individual intervention components. Our framework is directly developed from the substance use disorder and mental health treatment literature and allows for transdiagnostic comparisons and an organized conceptual mapping of interventions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.365 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations109
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207