| Title |
Partners and Alerts in Medication Adherence: A Randomized Clinical Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-018-4389-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Judd B. Kessler, Andrea B. Troxel, David A. Asch, Shivan J. Mehta, Noora Marcus, Raymond Lim, Jingsan Zhu, William Shrank, Troyen Brennan, Kevin G. Volpp |
| Abstract |
Poor medication adherence is common and limits the effectiveness of treatment. To investigate how social supports, automated alerts, and their combination improve medication adherence. Four-arm, randomized clinical trial with a 6-month intervention. A total of 179 CVS health employees or adult dependents with CVS Caremark prescription coverage, a current daily statin prescription, a medication possession ratio less than 80%, and Internet access. Participants were randomly assigned to control, social support (partner), automated adherence alert messages (alert), or both social support and alerts (partner + alert). Participants in the social support arms were asked to name a medication adherence partner (MAP) to help them take their medication. Participants in the alert arms were sent emails, text messages, or automated phone calls if they had failed to adhere on the previous day and on one or both of the 2 days before that. In partner + alert, both participants and fully enrolled MAPs received alerts. Adherence measured by wireless pill bottle opening. Compared to 36.0% adherence in control, adherence was significantly greater in the alert arm (52.9%, difference vs. control of 17.0%, 95% CI for difference 6.3 to 27.6%, P = 0.002) and the partner + alert arm (54.5%, difference vs. control of 18.6%, 95% CI for difference 6.6 to 30.5%, P = 0.003). Adherence in the partner arm was not statistically significantly greater than control (43.2%, difference vs. control of 7.2%, 95% CI of difference - 5.2% to 19.5%, P = 0.25). There were no statistically significant differences among the three treatment arms. Fewer participants invited a MAP in the partner + alert arm than the partner arm (P = 0.02). Automated alerts were effective at improving medication adherence. Assigning a medication adherence partner did not statistically significantly affect adherence rates. ClinicalTrials.gov Number NCT01890018 [ https://clinicaltrials.gov /]. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 25% |
| Unknown | 9 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 22% |
| Unknown | 24 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 31 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,332,742
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2,404
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,307
of 337,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#55
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.