Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31573901›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

The Internet Intervention Patient Adherence Scale for Guided Internet-Delivered Behavioral Interventions: Development and Psychometric Evaluation.

Fabian Lenhard, Kajsa Mitsell, Maral Jolstedt, Sarah Vigerland, Tove Wahlund, Martina Nord, Johan Bjureberg, Hanna Sahlin, Per Andrén, Kristina Aspvall and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

14 authors.

Fabian LenhardCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0930-6412
Kajsa MitsellStockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9505-8314
Maral JolstedtCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9427-295X
Sarah VigerlandCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6788-3317
Tove WahlundCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5123-2392
Martina NordCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7023-9012
Johan BjurebergCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2747-9990
Hanna SahlinCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6353-024X
Per AndrénCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1358-0166
Kristina AspvallCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2973-6949
Karin MelinInstitute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3297-7735
David Mataix-ColsCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4545-0924
Eva SerlachiusCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-7115-6422
Jens HögströmCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, & Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5313-8498

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient adherence is defined as the extent to which a patient complies with medical or health advice. At present, there is a lack of reliable and valid measures specifically designed to measure adherence to internet-delivered behavioral interventions.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to develop and psychometrically evaluate a novel measure of adherence to guided internet-delivered behavioral interventions.

methodsIn collaboration with experienced clinicians and researchers in the field, a 5-item, clinician-rated internet intervention Patient Adherence Scale (iiPAS) was developed. The initial scale was tested in a sample of children and adolescents (N=50) participating in internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) studies. A revised version of the iiPAS was then administered to a larger sample of children and adolescents (N=148) with various behavioral problems participating in ICBT trials. The scale was evaluated according to a classical test theory framework.

resultsThe iiPAS demonstrated excellent internal consistency. Factor analyses revealed one underlying factor, explaining about 80% of the variance, suggesting that the scale captures a homogeneous adherence construct. The iiPAS was strongly associated with objective measures of patient activity in ICBT (number of logins, number of written characters, and completed modules). Furthermore, mid- and posttreatment ratings of the iiPAS were significantly correlated with treatment outcomes. By contrast, objective measures of patient activity in the Web-based platform did not correlate with treatment outcomes.

conclusionsThe iiPAS could be a useful tool to measure adherence in a broad range of internet-delivered behavioral interventions.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildFemaleHumansInternet-Based InterventionMalePatient CompliancePsychometricsTelemedicineTreatment Outcomecognitive behavioral therapyeHealthinternetmeasurepatient compliance

Identifiers

PMID31573901
PMCPMC6774571

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.