Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34463018›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2021

The Attitude towards Polypills Questionnaire (APPQ): a phase I-III development and validation study in patients with cerebrovascular disease.

Jens Lehmann, David Riedl, Monika Sztankay, Christian Boehme, Julian Fischnaller, Stefan Kiechl, Bernhard Holzner, Michael Knoflach, Gerhard Rumpold

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of neurology, 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. European journal of neurology · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jens LehmannUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4670-7517
David RiedlUniversity Clinic of Medical Psychology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Monika SztankayUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Christian BoehmeDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Julian FischnallerMedical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Stefan KiechlDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Bernhard HolznerUniversity Hospital of Psychiatry I, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Michael KnoflachDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Gerhard RumpoldUniversity Clinic of Medical Psychology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeThe polypill approach has been proposed to reduce patients' pill burden, increase medication adherence and lower stroke incidence. However, little is known about patients' attitudes towards polypills for cerebrovascular medication.

methodsBased on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Group questionnaire development guidelines, a questionnaire to measure patients' attitudes towards polypills for the secondary prevention of stroke (phase I-III) was developed. In phase I, issues were generated via literature review and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals. The issues were operationalized into items in phase II. In phase III the questionnaire was validated in a large single-centre sample, and test-retest and internal validity were evaluated.

resultsIn phase I, 34 relevant issues were identified through literature search and interviews. Pre-testing the questionnaire indicated high applicability and comprehensibility. The final Attitudes towards Polypills Questionnaire was tested in N = 260 patients and showed a two-factor structure. The factors were labelled 'concerns' and 'benefits'. The scales showed acceptable and good internal validity (concerns, Cronbach's α = 0.85; benefits, α = 0.93), but the scales' test-retest validity was ambiguous. On a 0 to 3 rating scale, concerns were rated lower than benefits (mean 1.07, SD 0.69 vs. mean 1.87, SD 0.89).

conclusionsThe Attitudes towards Polypills Questionnaire showed high comprehensibility and content validity to assess German language patients' attitudes towards a polypill medication. Our data and questionnaire may aid the implementation of polypill treatments in clinical practice and can be used in the design of future clinical trials on polypill therapy. Further validation of the questionnaire is advised.

Indexed as

Cerebrovascular DisordersQuality of LifeAttitudeHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSecondary PreventionSurveys and Questionnairesadherenceattitudebenefitscombined pillconcernsfixed-dose combinationpolypill

Identifiers

PMID34463018
PMCPMC9292587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.