Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34081099›Full record

SynthesisJAMA ophthalmology2021

Defining Nonadherence and Nonpersistence to Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapies in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Mali Okada, Tien Yin Wong, Paul Mitchell, Bora Eldem, S James Talks, Tariq Aslam, Vincent Daien, Francisco J Rodriguez, Richard Gale, Jane Barratt and 2 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Ranibizumab port delivery system for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: Current evidence and surgical considerations.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  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. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 12 institutions in 9 countries.

Mali OkadaRoyal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Tien Yin WongSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore.
Paul MitchellWestmead Institute for Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Bora EldemDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
S James TalksThe Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Tariq AslamDivision of Pharmacy and Optometry, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester School of Health Sciences, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Vincent DaienMontpellier University Hospital, Montpellier, France.
Francisco J RodriguezFundación Oftalmologica Nacional, Universidad del Rosario School of Medicine, Bogotá, Colombia.
Richard GaleDepartment of Ophthalmology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, United Kingdom.
Jane BarrattInternational Federation on Ageing, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Robert P FingerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Anat LoewensteinDivision of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Duke-NUS Medical School · SGHacettepe University · TRInternational Federation on Ageing · CANewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBTel Aviv University · ILThe Royal Victorian Eye & Ear Hospital · AUUniversidad del Rosario · COUniversité de Montpellier · FRUniversity of Bonn · DEUniversity of Manchester · GBWestmead Institute for Medical Research · AUYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Poor adherence or persistence to treatment can be a barrier to optimizing clinical practice (real-world) outcomes to intravitreal injection therapy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Currently, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and classification of adherence specific to this context. Objective: To describe the development and validation of terminology on patient nonadherence and nonpersistence to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Following a systematic review of currently used terminology in the literature, a subcommittee panel of retinal experts developed a set of definitions and classification for validation. Definitions were restricted to use in patients with nAMD requiring intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. Validation by the full nAMD Barometer Leadership Coalition was established using a modified Delphi approach, with predetermined mean scores of 7.5 or more signifying consensus. Subsequent endorsement of the definitions was provided from a second set of retinal experts, with more than 50% members agreeing or strongly agreeing with all definitions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development of consensus definitions for the terms adherence and persistence and a classification system for the factors associated with treatment nonadherence or nonpersistence in patients with nAMD. Results: Nonadherence was defined as missing 2 or more treatment or monitoring visits over a period of 12 months, with a visit considered missed if it exceeded more than 2 weeks from the recommended date. Nonpersistence was defined by nonattendance or an appointment not scheduled within the last 6 months. The additional terms planned discontinuation and transfer of care were also established. Reasons for treatment nonadherence and nonpersistence were classified into 6 dimensions: (1) patient associated, (2) condition associated, (3) therapy associated, (4) health system and health care team associated, (5) social/economic, and (6) other, with subcategories specific to treatment for nAMD. Conclusions and Relevance: This classification system provides a framework for assessing treatment nonadherence and nonpersistence over time and across different health settings in the treatment of nAMD with current intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatments. This may have additional importance, given the potential association of the coronavirus pandemic on adherence to treatment in patients with nAMD.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceNeovascularization, PathologicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Terminology as TopicAngiogenesis InhibitorsConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansIntravitreal InjectionsMacular DegenerationSignal TransductionSocioeconomic FactorsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAngiogenesis InhibitorsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A

Identifiers

PMID34081099
PMCPMC8176386
OpenAlexW3165351758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.