MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022074039 · doi:10.1111/petr.13709

Promoting medication adherence from the perspective of adolescent and young adult kidney transplant recipients, parents, and health care professionals: A TAKE‐IT TOO study

2020· article· en· W3022074039 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christina Nguyen, Mary Amanda Dew, Taya Irizarry, Mary McNulty, Janet E. Rennick, Bärbel Knaüper, Annie Descôteaux, Audrey Grenier, Lovemine Jeannot, Bethany J. Foster, Annette DeVito Dabbs

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionStakeholderFocus groupHealth careNursingQualitative researchTransplantationFamily medicineMedical educationPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medication non-adherence is an important factor limiting allograft survival after kidney transplantation in AYA. Some interventions, including the TAKE-IT, showed some success in promoting adherence but the potential for scalability and use in routine clinical practice is limited. We applied user-centered design to gather the perspectives of recipients, parents, and health professionals concerning their needs, challenges, and potential intervention strategies to design an optimal, multi-component medication adherence intervention. The qualitative study was conducted at four Canadian and three American kidney transplant programs. Separate focus groups for recipients, parents, and health professionals were convened to explore these stakeholders' perspectives. Directed content analysis was employed to identify themes that were shared vs distinct across stakeholders. All stakeholder groups reported challenges related to taking medications on time in the midst of their busy schedules and the demands of transitioning toward independence during adolescence. The stakeholders also made suggestions for the multi-component behavioral intervention, including an expanded electronic pillbox and companion website, education materials, and customized digitized features to support shared responsibility and communication among recipients, parents, and health professionals. Several suggestions regarding the functionality and features of the potential intervention reported in this early stage will be explored in more depth as the iterative process unfolds. Our approach to actively involve all stakeholders in the process increases the likelihood of designing an adherence intervention that is truly user-informed and fit for the clinical setting.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.327 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric TransplantationSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207