Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26240747›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in psychopharmacology2015

Use of automated medication adherence monitoring in bipolar disorder research: pitfalls, pragmatics, and possibilities.

Jennifer B Levin, Johnny Sams, Curtis Tatsuoka, Kristin A Cassidy, Martha Sajatovic

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Medication nonadherence in bipolar disorder: a narrative review.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2018
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

5 authors.

Jennifer B LevinDepartment of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 10524 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44106 USA.
Johnny SamsDepartment of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Curtis TatsuokaNeurological and Behavioral Outcomes Center, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Kristin A CassidyDepartment of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Martha SajatovicDepartment of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of ClevelandUL1TR000439 · NCATS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTAN, MICHAEL W. · 2012 to 2016
$50.0M
Treatment Adherence Enhancement in Bipolar DisorderR01MH093321 · NIMH · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI SAJATOVIC, MARTHA X · 2012 to 2017
$2.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000439NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH093321
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMedication nonadherence occurs in 20-60% of persons with bipolar disorder (BD) and is associated with serious negative outcomes, including relapse, hospitalization, incarceration, suicide and high healthcare costs. Various strategies have been developed to measure adherence in BD. This descriptive paper summarizes challenges and workable strategies using electronic medication monitoring in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) in patients with BD.

methodsDescriptive data from 57 nonadherent individuals with BD enrolled in a prospective RCT evaluating a novel customized adherence intervention versus control were analyzed. Analyses focused on whole group data and did not assess intervention effects. Adherence was assessed with the self-reported Tablets Routine Questionnaire and the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS).

resultsThe majority of participants were women (74%), African American (69%), with type I BD (77%). Practical limitations of MEMS included misuse in conjunction with pill minders, polypharmacy, cost, failure to bring to research visits, losing the device, and the device impacting baseline measurement. The advantages were more precise measurement, less biased recall, and collecting data from past time periods for missed interim visits.

conclusionsAutomated devices such as MEMS can assist investigators in evaluating adherence in patients with BD. Knowing the anticipated pitfalls allows study teams to implement preemptive procedures for successful implementation in BD adherence studies and can help pave the way for future refinements as automated adherence assessment technologies become more sophisticated and readily available.

Indexed as

bipolar disordermedication adherencerandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID26240747
PMCPMC4521443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.