Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30863023›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2019

Mode of injection and treatment adherence: results of a survey characterizing the perspectives of health care providers and US women 18-45 years old.

David L Gandell, E Jay Bienen, Jennifer Gudeman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Effect of Allele-Specific Clcn7Calcified tissue international · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. RNA therapeutics in the clinic.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Newly formulated GROWJECTClinical pediatric endocrinology : case reports and clinical investigations : official journal of the Japanese Society for Pediatric Endocrinology · 2021
    Article
  15. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David L GandellDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
E Jay BienenThe Curry Rockefeller Group, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
Jennifer GudemanMedical Affairs, AMAG Pharmaceuticals Inc., Waltham, MA, USA, jgudeman@amagpharma.com.
AMAG Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USCurry College · USUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA market research study was conducted to characterize perceptions of intramuscular (IM) and subcutaneous (SC) routes of injection, including use of autoinjectors, and how these perceptions affect adherence to injection regimens. The perspectives were from women of childbearing age (18-45 years old; consumers) and health care providers (HCPs) involved in women's health care.

methodsTwo telephone surveys, one of HCPs and the other of consumers, were conducted by KRC Research (New York, NY, USA) between May and July 2017. HCPs were recruited across the US; the consumer survey was administered to a nationally representative sample. Survey questions identified potential challenges of IM and SC administration, their impact on treatment adherence, and perceptions of autoinjectors. Results are reported using descriptive statistics and reflect an unweighted sample; margin of error is ±3% for the consumer survey.

resultsHCP respondents included 100 generalist OB/GYNs, 101 maternal-fetal medicine specialists, and 519 nurses; there were 1,012 female consumer respondents. Nurses reported more experience than physicians in administering injections, including with autoinjectors. Consumers reported having received treatments via both IM and SC injections; 26% had received treatment with injections at regular intervals. Most HCPs (58%) said they preferred to administer SC injections, which was also the preference for receiving injections among consumers, who reported needle size as a concern regardless of administration mode. Other major concerns were perceptions of pain and fear/anxiety, and seeing the needle, all of which were greater for IM than for SC injections. HCPs and consumers both reported greater likelihood of adherence to therapy administered SC using an autoinjector because they believe that this method provides substantial HCP and patient benefits.

conclusionHCPs and consumers identified similar challenges with adherence to injections. However, there was consistently higher preference for SC relative to IM. HCPs and consumers believe that autoinjectors may increase adherence.

Indexed as

adherenceinjectionintramuscularpatient preferencesubcutaneouswomen’s health care

Identifiers

PMID30863023
PMCPMC6391128
OpenAlexW2916512992

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.