Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716063›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2016

Measurement of adherence in a randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention: supported self-management for adults with learning disability and type 2 diabetes.

Liz Graham, Judy Wright, Rebecca Walwyn, Amy M Russell, Louise Bryant, Amanda Farrin, Allan House

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Talking the same language on patient empowerment: Development and content validation of a taxonomy of self-management interventions for chronic conditions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liz GrahamLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. e.h.graham@leeds.ac.uk.
Judy WrightLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rebecca WalwynLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Amy M RussellLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Louise BryantLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Amanda FarrinLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Allan HouseLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
University of Leeds · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/102/03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReporting adherence to intervention delivery and uptake is a detailed way of describing what was actually delivered and received, in comparison to what was intended. Measuring and reporting adherence is not routinely done well in complex interventions. The OK Diabetes trial (ISRCTN41897033) aimed to develop and subsequently test the feasibility of implementing a supported self-management intervention in adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes. A key study objective was to develop a measure of adherence to the intervention.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of published literature, extracting data from included papers using a standardised proforma. We undertook a narrative synthesis of papers to determine the form and content of methods for adherence measurement for self-management interventions in this population that had already been developed. We used the framework and data extraction form developed for the review as the basis for an adherence measurement tool that we applied in the OK Diabetes trial.

resultsThe literature review found variability in the quality and content of adherence measurement and reporting, with no standardised approach. We were able to develop an adherence measure based upon the review, and populate it with data collected during the OK Diabetes trial. The adherence tool proved satisfactory for recording and measuring adherence in the trial.

conclusionThere remains a need for a standardised approach to adherence measurement in the field of complex interventions. We have shown that it is possible to produce a simple, feasible measure for assessing adherence in the OK Diabetes trial.

Indexed as

Patient ComplianceSelf CareAdultDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansLearning DisabilitiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAdherenceComplex interventionsFidelityLearning disabilityReporting standardsSelf-managementType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID27716063
PMCPMC5052902
OpenAlexW2528908689

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.