ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Novel methods to estimate antiretroviral adherence: protocol for a longitudinal study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing pill counts and patient self-reports versus DBS tenofovir concentrations as ART adherence measurements with virologic outcomes and HIV drug resistance in a cohort of adolescents and young adults failing ART in Harare, Zimbabwe.Journal of infection and public health · 2024Trial
- Acceptability and Feasibility of Using Hair Samples for Chronic Stress Measurement Among Transgender Women in Brazil.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Article
- Perceptions and Experiences of Returning Self-collected Specimens for HIV, Bacterial STI and Potential PrEP Adherence Testing among Sexual Minority Men in the United States.AIDS and behavior · 2023Article
- Virologic Nonsuppression Among Patients With HIV Newly Diagnosed With Cancer at Uganda Cancer Institute: A Cross-Sectional Study.JCO global oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Association of Hair Concentrations of Antiretrovirals with Virologic Outcomes Among People Living with HIV in Guangxi, China.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Approaches to Objectively Measure Antiretroviral Medication Adherence and Drive Adherence Interventions.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2020Review
- Research in the Time of Coronavirus: Continuing Ongoing Studies in the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- Moving Antiretroviral Adherence Assessments to the Modern Era: Correlations Among Three Novel Measures of Adherence.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of novel methods to estimate antiretroviral adherence: A longitudinal study.PloS one · 2019Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThere is currently no gold standard for assessing antiretroviral (ARV) adherence, so researchers often resort to the most feasible and cost-effective methods possible (eg, self-report), which may be biased or inaccurate. The goal of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of innovative and remote methods to estimate ARV adherence, which can potentially be conducted with less time and financial resources in a wide range of clinic and research settings. Here, we describe the research protocol for studying these novel methods and some lessons learned.
methodsThe 6-month pilot study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a remotely conducted study to evaluate the correlation between: 1) text-messaged photographs of pharmacy refill dates for refill-based adherence; 2) text-messaged photographs of pills for pill count-based adherence; and 3) home-collected hair sample measures of ARV concentration for pharmacologic-based adherence. Participants were sent monthly automated text messages to collect refill dates and pill counts that were taken and sent via mobile telephone photographs, and hair collection kits every 2 months by mail. At the study end, feasibility was calculated by specific metrics, such as the receipt of hair samples and responses to text messages. Participants completed a quantitative survey and qualitative exit interviews to examine the acceptability of these adherence evaluation methods. The relationship between the 3 novel metrics of adherence and self-reported adherence will be assessed. DISCUSSION: Investigators conducting adherence research are often limited to using either self-reported adherence, which is subjective, biased, and often overestimated, or other more complex methods. Here, we describe the protocol for evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of 3 novel and remote methods of estimating adherence, with the aim of evaluating the relationships between them. Additionally, we note the lessons learned from the protocol implementation to date. We expect that these novel measures will be feasible and acceptable. The implications of this research will be the identification and evaluation of innovative and accurate metrics of ARV adherence for future implementation.
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.