Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26553830›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2015

Feedback on SMS reminders to encourage adherence among patients taking antipsychotic medication: a cross-sectional survey nested within a randomised trial.

Kati Anneli Kannisto, Clive E Adams, Marita Koivunen, Jouko Katajisto, Maritta Välimäki

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Kati Anneli KannistoDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland Satakunta Hospital District Pori, Finland.
Clive E AdamsDivision of Psychiatry, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Marita KoivunenDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland Satakunta Hospital District Pori, Finland.
Jouko KatajistoDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Maritta VälimäkiDepartment of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
University of Turku · FIInstitute of Mental Health · GBTurku University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore feedback on tailored SMS reminders to encourage medication adherence and outpatient treatment among patients taking antipsychotic medication, and associations related to the feedback.

designA cross-sectional survey nested within a nationwide randomised clinical trial ("Mobile.Net" ISRCTN27704027).

settingPsychiatric outpatient care in Finland.

participantsBetween September 2012 and December 2013, 403 of 558 adults with antipsychotic medication responded after 12 months of SMS intervention.

main outcome measureFeedback was gathered with a structured questionnaire based on Technology Acceptance Model theory. Data were analysed by Pearson's χ(2) test, binary logistic regression and stepwise multiple regression analyses.

resultsAlmost all participants (98%) found the SMS reminders easy to use and 87% felt that the SMS did not cause harm. About three-quarters (72%) were satisfied with the SMS received, and 61% found it useful. Divorced people were particularly prone to find SMS reminders useful (χ(2)=13.17, df=6, p=0.04), and people seeking employment were more often 'fully satisfied' with the SMS compared with other groups (χ(2)=10.82, df=4, p=0.029). People who were older at first contact with psychiatric services were more often 'fully satisfied' than younger groups (OR=1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04, p=0.007).

conclusionsThe feedback of patients taking antipsychotic medication on SMS services was generally positive. Overall, people were quite satisfied despite considerable variation in their sociodemographic background and illness history. Our results endorse that the use of simple easy-to-use existing technology, such as mobile phones and SMS, is acceptable in psychiatric outpatient services. Moreover, people using psychiatric outpatient services are able to use this technology. This acceptable and accessible technology can be easily tailored to each patient's needs and could be customised to the needs of the isolated or jobless. This is an area in which much careful evaluation is needed.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneMedication AdherenceReminder SystemsText MessagingAdolescentAdultAgedAntipsychotic AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFinlandHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareAntipsychotic AgentsMENTAL HEALTHPsychiatric ServicesText Messaging

Identifiers

PMID26553830
PMCPMC4654352
OpenAlexW2266627154

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.