ArticleBMC rheumatology2021
Researchers' perspectives on methodological challenges and outcomes selection in interventional studies targeting medication adherence in rheumatic diseases: an OMERACT-adherence study.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of bias tools for medication adherence research: RoBIAS and RoBOAS.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Tailored Self-Management Interventions for People with Chronic Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in rheumatic and musculoskeletal research: an idea whose time has firmly come.BMC rheumatology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch on adherence interventions in rheumatology is limited by methodological issues, particularly heterogeneous outcomes. We aimed to describe researchers' experiences with conducting interventional studies targeting medication adherence in rheumatology and their perspectives on establishing core outcomes.
methodsSemi-structured interviews using audio conference were conducted with researchers who had conducted an adherence study of any design in the past 10 years. Data collection and thematic analysis were performed iteratively, until saturation.
resultsWe interviewed 13 researchers, most of whom worked in academia and specialized in epidemiology and/or health services research. We identified three themes: 1) improving measurement of adherence (considering all phases of adherence, using appropriate and relevant measures, and establishing clinically meaningful thresholds); 2) challenges in designing and appraising adherence intervention studies (considering the confusion over a plethora of outcomes, difficulties with powering studies to demonstrate meaningful changes, and suboptimal descriptions of adherence interventions in published studies); and 3) advancing outcome assessment in adherence intervention studies (capturing rationale for developing a core domain set as well as recommendations and anticipated challenges by participants).
conclusionsUniquely gathering perspectives from international adherence researchers, our findings led to researcher-informed recommendations for improving adherence research including specifying the targeted adherence phase in designing interventions and studies and providing a glossary of terms to promote consistency in reporting. We also identified recommendations for developing a core domain set for interventional studies targeting medication adherence including involvement of patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders and methodological and practical considerations to establish rigor and support uptake.
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.