Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25792814›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2015

Patients' beliefs about adherence to oral antidiabetic treatment: a qualitative study.

Line Guénette, Sophie Lauzier, Laurence Guillaumie, Gabriel Giguère, Jean-Pierre Grégoire, Jocelyne Moisan

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A review of factors influencing non-adherence to oral antineoplastic drugs.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Line GuénetteFaculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; Chair on Adherence to Treatments, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; CHU de Québec Research Center, Population Health and Optimal Practices Research Unit, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Sophie LauzierFaculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; Chair on Adherence to Treatments, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; CHU de Québec Research Center, Population Health and Optimal Practices Research Unit, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Laurence GuillaumieChair on Adherence to Treatments, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; CHU de Québec Research Center, Population Health and Optimal Practices Research Unit, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; Faculty of Nursing, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Gabriel GiguèreFaculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Jean-Pierre GrégoireFaculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; Chair on Adherence to Treatments, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; CHU de Québec Research Center, Population Health and Optimal Practices Research Unit, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
Jocelyne MoisanFaculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; Chair on Adherence to Treatments, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada ; CHU de Québec Research Center, Population Health and Optimal Practices Research Unit, Quebec City, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to elicit patients' beliefs about taking their oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) as prescribed to inform the development of sound adherence-enhancing interventions.

methodsA qualitative study was performed. Adults with type 2 diabetes who had been taking an OAD for >3 months were solicited to participate in one of six focus groups. Discussions were facilitated using a structured guide designed to gather beliefs related to important constructs of the theory of planned behavior. Four coders using this theory as the theoretical framework analyzed the videotaped discussions.

resultsForty-five adults participated. The most frequently mentioned advantages for OAD-taking as prescribed were to avoid long-term complications and to control glycemia. Family members were perceived as positively influential. Carrying the OAD at all times, having the OAD in sight, and having a routine were important facilitating factors. Being away from home, not accepting the disease, and not having confidence in the physician's prescription were major barriers to OAD-taking.

conclusionThis study elicited several beliefs regarding OAD-taking behavior. Awareness of these beliefs may help clinicians adjust their interventions in view of their patients' beliefs. Moreover, this knowledge is crucial to the planning, development, and evaluation of interventions that aim to improve medication adherence.

Indexed as

focus groupsmedication adherencetheory of planned behaviortype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID25792814
PMCPMC4362977

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.