Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20581423›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical ethics2010

Acceptability of offering financial incentives to achieve medication adherence in patients with severe mental illness: a focus group study.

Stefan Priebe, Julia Sinclair, Alexandra Burton, Stamatina Marougka, John Larsen, Mike Firn, Richard Ashcroft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Stefan PriebeQueen Mary University of London, Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Newham Centre for Mental Health, London, UK. s.priebe@qmul.ac.uk
Julia Sinclair
Alexandra Burton
Stamatina Marougka
John Larsen
Mike Firn
Richard Ashcroft

Funding

Department of Health 07/60/43Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 081433/Z/06/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOffering financial incentives to achieve medication adherence in patients with severe mental illness is controversial.

aimsTo explore the views of different stakeholders on the ethical acceptability of the practice.

methodFocus group study consisting of 25 groups with different stakeholders.

resultsEleven themes dominated the discussions and fell into four categories: (1) 'wider concerns', including the value of medication, source of funding, how patients would use the money, and a presumed government agenda behind the idea; (2) 'problems requiring clear policies', comprising of practicalities and assurance that incentives are only one part of a tool kit; (3) 'challenges for research and experience', including effectiveness, the possibility of perverse incentives, and impact on the therapeutic relationship; (4) 'inherent dilemmas' around fairness and potential coercion.

conclusionsThe use of financial incentives is likely to raise similar concerns in most stakeholders, only some of which can be addressed by empirical research and clear policies.

Indexed as

MotivationRewardAdultAgedAntipsychotic AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMedication AdherenceMental DisordersMiddle AgedUnited KingdomYoung AdultAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

PMID20581423
PMCPMC2976611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.