MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995334913 · doi:10.2196/14888

Using an Electronic Medication Event–Monitoring System for Antiretroviral Therapy Self-Management Among African American Women Living With HIV in Rural Florida: Cohort Study

2019· article· en· W2995334913 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Lucero, Renessa Williams, Tanisia Esalomi, Paula Alexander‐Delpech, Christa Cook, Ragnhildur I. Bjarnadóttir

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismUniversity of Florida
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionAntiretroviral medicationAntiretroviral therapyMedication adherenceHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Exploratory researchMedication therapy managementFamily medicineGerontologyViral loadNursingPharmacyPharmacist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: HIV remains a significant health issue in the United States and disproportionately affects African Americans. African American women living with HIV (AAWH) experience a particularly high number of barriers when attempting to manage their HIV care, including antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence. To enable the development and assessment of effective interventions that address these barriers to support ART adherence, there is a critical need to understand more fully the use of objective measures of ART adherence among AAWH, including electronic medication dispensers for real-time surveillance. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the use of the Wisepill medication event-monitoring system (MEMS) and compare the objective and subjective measures of ART adherence. METHODS: We conducted a 30-day exploratory pilot study of the MEMS among a convenience sample of community-dwelling AAWH (N=14) in rural Florida. AAWH were trained on the use of the MEMS to determine the feasibility of collecting, capturing, and manipulating the MEMS data for an objective measure of ART adherence. Self-reported sociodemographic information, including a self-reported measure of ART adherence, was also collected from AAWH. RESULTS: We found that the majority of participants were successful at using the electronic MEMS. Daily use of the MEMS tended to be outside of the usual time participants took their medication. Three 30-day medication event patterns were found that characterized ART adherence, specifically uniform and nonuniform medication adherence and nonuniform medication nonadherence. There were relatively few MEMS disruptions among study participants. Overall, adjusted daily ART adherence was 81.08% and subjective ART adherence was 77.78%. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study on the use and evaluation of the Wisepill MEMS among AAWH in rural Florida is the first such study in the United States. The findings of this study are encouraging because 10 out of 12 participants consistently used the MEMS, there were relatively few failures, and objective adjusted daily and overall subjective ART adherence were very similar. On the basis of these findings, we think researchers should consider using the Wisepill MEMS in future studies of AAWH and people living with HIV in the United States after taking into account our practical suggestions. The following practical considerations are suggested when measuring objective medication adherence: (1) before using an MEMS, be familiar with the targeted populations' characteristics; (2) choose an MEMS that aligns with the participants' day-to-day activities; (3) ensure the MEMS' features and resulting data support the research goals; (4) assess the match among the user's ability, wireless features of the MEMS, and the geographic location of the participants; and (5) consider the cost of MEMS and the research budget.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207