MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179980346 · doi:10.1002/acr.24744

Rapid Review of Medication Taking (Adherence) Among Patients With Rheumatic Diseases During the COVID‐19 Pandemic

2021· article· en· W3179980346 on OpenAlexaff
Nevena Rebić, Jamie Yea Eun Park, Ria Garg, Ursula Ellis, Ayano Kelly, Eileen Davidson, Mary A. De Vera

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesResearch CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiscontinuationMedical prescriptionCINAHLPandemicConfidence intervalMEDLINEFamily medicineEpidemiologyMedication adherenceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)RheumatologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicinePsychological interventionPsychiatryPharmacologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify, appraise, synthesize, and contextualize rapidly emerging reports on medication taking (adherence) among patients with rheumatic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for peer-reviewed communications, letters, and articles published during the COVID-19 pandemic evaluating medication taking among individuals with rheumatic diseases. We appraised assessment and reporting of medication adherence according to established definitions of 3 distinct problems of medication taking (i.e., noninitiation, poor implementation, and discontinuation) and pooled findings using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 31 peer-reviewed studies in our synthesis from various jurisdictions, of which 25 described medication taking among rheumatology patients and 6 described medication prescribing among rheumatology providers. The pooled prevalence of overall medication nonadherence was 14.8% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 12.3-17.2) and that of medication discontinuation (i.e., stopping of prescriptions) and poor implementation (i.e., not taking medication at the dose/frequency prescribed) as 9.5% (95% CI 5.1-14.0) and 9.6% (95% CI 6.2-13.0), respectively. Noninitiation (i.e., not starting/not filling new prescriptions) was not addressed. CONCLUSION: Medication taking among individuals with rheumatic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic varies globally. Unclear reporting and extensive variation in research methods between studies create barriers to research replication, comparison, and generalization to specific patient populations. Future research in this area should use consistent and transparent approaches to defining and measuring medication taking problems to ensure that findings appropriately describe the epidemiology of medication adherence and have the potential to identify modifiable targets for improving patient care.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.184
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.184
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0350.026
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207