Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24465418›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

How patients take malaria treatment: a systematic review of the literature on adherence to antimalarial drugs.

Katia Bruxvoort, Catherine Goodman, S Patrick Kachur, David Schellenberg

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Adherence to Mass Drug Administration with Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine andThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020
    Trial
  10. Provider and household costs ofBulletin of the World Health Organization · 2019
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Observational
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Katia BruxvoortLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom ; Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Catherine GoodmanLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
S Patrick KachurUnited States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
David SchellenbergLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh levels of patient adherence to antimalarial treatment are important in ensuring drug effectiveness. To achieve this goal, it is important to understand levels of patient adherence, and the range of study designs and methodological challenges involved in measuring adherence and interpreting results. Since antimalarial adherence was reviewed in 2004, there has been a major expansion in the use of artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) in the public sector, as well as initiatives to make them more widely accessible through community health workers and private retailers. These changes and the large number of recent adherence studies raise the need for an updated review on this topic.

objectiveWe conducted a systematic review of studies reporting quantitative results on patient adherence to antimalarials obtained for treatment.

resultsThe 55 studies identified reported extensive variation in patient adherence to antimalarials, with many studies reporting very high adherence (90-100%) and others finding adherence of less than 50%. We identified five overarching approaches to assessing adherence based on the definition of adherence and the methods used to measure it. Overall, there was no clear pattern in adherence results by approach. However, adherence tended to be higher among studies where informed consent was collected at the time of obtaining the drug, where patient consultations were directly observed by research staff, and where a diagnostic test was obtained.

conclusionVariations in reported adherence may reflect factors related to patient characteristics and the nature of their consultation with the provider, as well as methodological variations such as interaction between the research team and patients before and during the treatment. Future studies can benefit from an awareness of the impact of study procedures on adherence outcomes, and the identification of improved measurement methods less dependent on self-report.

Indexed as

AntimalarialsArtemisininsHumansMalariaPatient ComplianceAntimalarialsartemisininArtemisinins

Identifiers

PMID24465418
PMCPMC3896377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.