Evaluation of the Measurement Properties of Self-reported Medication Adherence Instruments Among People at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

Kim, Chun‐Ja; Schlenk, Elizabeth A.; Ahn, Jeong‐Ah; Kim, Moonsun; Park, Eun‐Young; Park, Jee-Won

doi:10.1177/0145721716655400

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 90 publications

(137 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the SR level, there were three studies 20 , 22 , 23 (n=3/18, 16.7%) that implemented the COSMIN checklist and only four studies 19 , 20 , 22 , 23 that reported PROM validity criteria (n=4/19, 21.1%) ( Figure 3 ). When evaluating each of the individually reported PROMs, a quarter (n=58/228, 25.4%) of studies reported PROMs without adequate evidence of validity as defined by this review ( Supplementary File 2 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

Wells¹,

Crilly²,

Kayyali³

2022

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Non-adherence to medicines is estimated to cost billions to healthcare providers across the US and Europe each year. Addressing medication adherence (MA) can be challenging. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to collect self-reported data on MA, among other behaviours. Despite the myriad PROMs available and their widespread implementation in research, there is little commentary or standardization on the way they are reported, or their validity assessed. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of systematic reviews (SRs) that report PROMs of MA with a focus on type 2 diabetes to explore PROM reporting and validity. Materials and Methods A literature search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Web of Science. SRs reporting on PROMs related to MA behaviour in patients living with type 2 diabetes were included. Any SR published in English prior to December 2021 was included. Abstract and title screening were performed prior to full-text review by two independent researchers with discrepancies managed by a third. Protocols and SRs reporting on paediatric populations were excluded. Results A total of 19 eligible SRs that included 241 unique PROM studies were captured from the initial 2074 records that were identified. Data were captured across a 30-year scope, with roughly half (47.4%, n=9/19) of the SRs published in the last 5 years. In total, 104 unique PROMs were identified. Inclusion of non-validated PROMs was identified in 63.2% (n=12/19) of the included SRs, and reporting issues were identified in 47.3% of studies (n=114/241). A lower journal impact factor was significantly associated with a higher prevalence of validity issues ( r =0.44, p =0.04). Conclusion There are a broad range of available PROMs; however, they have been reported inconsistently in the literature, often lacking significant evidence with respect to validity criteria. Standardization of reporting and assessments of validity may help to address this.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

Wells¹,

Crilly²,

Kayyali³

2022

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From the literature review, it was evident that the majority of publications were about countries with a developed HTA structure, such as Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico (2,4,7,8,10,13,(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46). This shortage of information reinforces the need for research in countries with less developed HTA and decision-making processes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening and implementing health technology assessment and the decision-making process in the Region of the Americas

Lessa

Caccavo

Curtis

et al. 2017

Rev Panam Salud Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used ET‐specific survey questions assessing reasons for ET non‐adherence (See online supplemental materials). These questions were based on existing medication adherence intruments and previous qualitative assessments of reasons for ET non‐adherence . Questions were cognitively tested with 12 breast cancer patients and revised iteratively based on patient input.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Associated with Endocrine Therapy Non‐Adherence in Breast Cancer Survivors

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: For women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer, long-term endocrine therapy (ET) can greatly reduce the risk of recurrence, yet adherence is low-particularly among traditionally underserved populations. Methods:The Carolina Breast Cancer Study oversampled Black and young women (<50 years of age). Participants answered an ET-specific medication adherence questionnaire assessing reasons for non-adherence. We used principal factor analysis to identify latent factors describing ET non-adherence. We then performed multivariable regression to determine clinical and demographic characteristics associated with each ET non-adherence factor.Results: 1,231 women were included in analysis, 59% reported at least one barrier to ET adherence. We identified three latent factors which we defined as: habit -challenges developing medication-taking behavior; tradeoffs -high perceived side effect burden and medication safety concerns; and resource barriers -challenges related to cost or accessibility. Older age (50+) was associated with less reporting of habit (Adjusted Risk Ratio (aRR) 0.54[95% CI: 0.43-0.69] and resource barriers (aRR 0.66 [0.43-0.997]), but was not associated with tradeoff barriers. Medicaid-insured women were more likely than privately-insured to report tradeoff (aRR:1.53 [1.10-2.13]) or resource barriers ). Black race was associated with increased reporting of all factors (habit: aRR 1.29[1.09-1.53]; tradeoffs: 1.32 [1.09-1.60], resources: 1.65[1.18-2.30]).Conclusion: Barriers to ET adherence were described by three distinct factors, and strongly associated with sociodemographic characteristics. Barriers to ET adherence appear inadequately addressed for younger, Black, and publicly-insured breast cancer survivors. These findings underscore the importance of developing multi-faceted, patient-centered interventions that address a diverse range of barriers to ET adherence.

show abstract

Evaluation of the Measurement Properties of Self-reported Medication Adherence Instruments Among People at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

Cited by 12 publications

References 90 publications

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

Strengthening and implementing health technology assessment and the decision-making process in the Region of the Americas

Factors Associated with Endocrine Therapy Non‐Adherence in Breast Cancer Survivors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About