ArticleMultiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical
Patient-Reported Disease-Modifying Therapy Adherence in the Clinic: A Reliable Metric?
Article in Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exit strategies for "needle fatigue" in multiple sclerosis: a propensity score-matched comparison study.Journal of neurology · 2020Article
- BetaEval Global: Prospective, Multinational, Observational Cohort Study of Patients Using BETACONNECTPatient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Mobile phone-based e-diary for assessment and enhancement of medications adherence among patients with multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
- Using an Intervention Mapping Approach to Improve Adherence to Disease-Modifying Treatment in Multiple Sclerosis.International journal of MS careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdherence to multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapy (DMT) is commonly assessed through patient reporting, but patient-reported adherence is rarely studied.
objectiveTo determine rates of DMT adherence reported from patient to clinician, reasons for nonadherence, and relationships between adherence and outcomes.
methodsWe identified relapsing-remitting MS patients on DMT for ≥3 months. DMT adherence was defined as taking ≥80% of doses. Linear and logistic regression models were created used to determine the association of baseline adherence with several patient reported outcomes and the timed 25-foot walk at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after the index visit.
resultsThe analysis included 1148 patients, of whom 501 had data at 6 months, 544 at 1 year, 331 at 2 years, and 247 at 3 years. Baseline adherence was 94.9% and overall adherence was 93.1%. Forgetting was the most common reason for missed doses. In the adjusted models, adherence was not associated with the outcomes.
conclusionsHigher than expected adherence and a lack of association between adherence and outcomes suggests patient reported adherence may not be reliable. Further research is needed to clarify the relationship between patient-reported adherence and relapses or new lesion formation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.