ArticleAtencion primaria2015
[In Process Citation].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [ADHEFAP: Clinical trial to evaluate an educational-behavioral telephone intervention by the primary care pharmacist to improve therapeutic adherence].Atencion primaria · 2023Trial
- A longitudinal study of symptoms beliefs in hypertension.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test the effectiveness of a program to improve treatment adherence in new onset hypertensive patients.
designThis is a quasi-experimental study. LOCATION: Four health centers in Almeria.
participantsA total of 120 subjects between 18 and 65 years, diagnosed with hypertension within the previous 12 months. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The participants were divided into three groups: intervention group A, which received educational instruction, intervention group B, educational instruction and feedback process, and the control group C, received usual care. Adherence was determined by lifestyle (diet, physical activity, smoking, alcohol) and drug treatment.
resultsAs regards diet and physical activity, there were significant differences between performance groups after intervention (p<0,05), with better adherence levels being found in group B subjects for these variables. Better adherence to pharmacological treatment was also observed in these patients. No significant results were found regarding alcohol and smoking.
conclusionsIn the study population, patients undergoing educational instruction and feedback had better adherence levels than those who received only instruction or usual treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.