Descriptive study of homeless patients’ perceptions that affect medication adherence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Results of a study to elucidate perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs about prescribed medications held by hospitalized patients who are homeless are reported. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study involving semistructured interviews was conducted to gather information and characterize hospitalized homeless patients' views and attitudes regarding medication use, with a focus on medication nonadherence. Medication nonadherence has been shown to be a factor contributing to higher rates of emergency department visits, increased hospital lengths of stay, and increased healthcare costs in homeless populations. Interviews were conducted during patients' admissions to the internal medicine service of a tertiary care, inner-city hospital. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed using conventional qualitative content analysis to generate data-driven codes and themes. RESULTS: Twelve interviews were conducted (median patient age, 48.5 years). Eight patients (66.7%) were living in a shelter, and 11 (91.7%) had a mental illness. Patients were prescribed a median of 4 medications at the time of hospital admission. Four themes were identified: (1) a new appreciation of medications was acquired during hospitalization, (2) medications were perceived as necessary for maintaining health, (3) there was an interest in receiving medication education, and (4) concerns were expressed regarding medication adverse effects. CONCLUSION: In interviews conducted during hospital admission, homeless patients expressed positive perceptions about the necessity of their medications but also concerns about medication adverse effects. Interventions to improve adherence may be successful if directed toward addressing treatment-related concerns.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".