MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404960008 · doi:10.1016/j.trre.2024.100900

Non-adherence to immunosuppressive medications in kidney transplant recipients- a systematic scoping review

2024· article· en· W4404960008 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael Corr, Andrew Walker, Alexander P. Maxwell, Gareth J. McKay

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilQueen's UniversityHealth Service ExecutiveQueen's University BelfastCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsMedicineKidney transplantIntensive care medicineMedication adherenceKidney transplantationInternal medicineKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rejection and graft failure remain common in kidney transplant recipients. Non-adherence to immunosuppressive medications is considered a major contributary factor to reduced long-term graft survival, particularly in younger people. Improvements in clinical practice based on adherence studies has been minimal. METHODS: Joanna Briggs' Institute Methodology was used. MedlineALL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus databases were searched from January 2000 through to December 2023. Abstract and full text reviews were undertaken independently by two reviewers. Data was collated using a pre-designed extraction tool. RESULTS: 359 articles met the inclusion criteria. Non-adherence was commonly defined using self-reported questionnaires or pharmacy re-fill rates. Prevalence of non-adherence varied widely. There was little correlation between method of measurement and reported rates of non-adherence. Despite younger age being identified as a risk factor for non-adherence, pooled reported prevalence did not differ significantly in studies reporting prevalence in children, adolescents, or young adults vs. older adults (36.0 % vs. 34.0 %). Interventional studies to detect or improve adherence are highly heterogenous, often report small effects and are limited by the lack of gold-standard methods to measure adherence. DISCUSSION: This scoping review outlines the complexities of non-adherence to immunosuppressive medications among kidney transplant recipients, highlighting significant variability in adherence definitions, measurements, and intervention efficacy. Reported non-adherence rates vary widely (2-89 %), underscoring the need for standardisation of the definition of non-adherence in research. Findings suggest that non-adherence to immunosuppressive medication is driven by a mix of demographic, psychosocial, and transplant-specific factors. Future research should prioritise standardised definitions of adherence, validated tools to measure adherence, and focus on clinically significant outcomes in non-adherent populations to develop meaningful, impactful interventions for long-term patient benefit.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations24
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantation ReviewsSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207