Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27889904›Full record

ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2016

How to Screen for Non-Adherence to Antihypertensive Therapy.

Pankaj Gupta, Prashanth Patel, Robert Horne, Heather Buchanan, Bryan Williams, Maciej Tomaszewski

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current hypertension reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. May Measure Month 2022 in Italy: A Focus on Fixed-dose Combination, Therapeutic Adherence, and Medical Inertia in a Nationwide Survey.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Projecting the long-term benefits of single pill combination therapy for patients with hypertension in five countries.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Brazilian Guidelines of Hypertension - 2020.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2021
    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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Pankaj GuptaDepartment of Metabolic Medicine and Chemical Pathology, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Prashanth PatelDepartment of Metabolic Medicine and Chemical Pathology, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Robert HorneDepartment of Behavioral Medicine, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Heather BuchananDivision of Rehabilitation and Ageing, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Bryan WilliamsInstitute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, UK.
Maciej TomaszewskiDivision of Cardiovascular Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. maciej.tomaszewski@manchester.ac.uk.
Glenfield Hospital · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBNational Institute for Health Research · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_13090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The quality of assessment of non-adherence to treatment in hypertensive is poor. Within this review, we discuss the different methods used to assess adherence to blood-pressure-lowering medications in hypertension patients. Subjective reports such as physicians' perceptions are inaccurate, and questionnaires completed by patients tend to overreport adherence and show a low diagnostic specificity. Indirect objective methods such as pharmacy database records can be useful, but they are limited by the robustness of the recorded data. Electronic medication monitoring devices are accurate but usually track adherence to only a single medication and can be expensive. Overall, the fundamental issue with indirect objective measures is that they do not fully confirm ingestion of antihypertensive medications. Detection of antihypertensive medications in body fluids using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry is currently, in our view, the most robust and clinically useful method to assess non-adherence to blood-pressure-lowering treatment. It is particularly helpful in patients presenting with resistant, refractory or uncontrolled hypertension despite the optimal therapy. We recommend using this diagnostic strategy to detect non-adherence alongside a no-blame approach tailoring support to address the perceptions (e.g. beliefs about the illness and treatment) and practicalities (e.g. capability and resources) influencing motivation and ability to adhere.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsDatabases, FactualHumansHypertensionMedication AdherenceSurveys and QuestionnairesAntihypertensive AgentsBlood pressure medicationHypertensionNon-adherenceUncontrolled hypertension

Identifiers

PMID27889904
PMCPMC5124437
OpenAlexW2554817370

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.