Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34712061›Full record

ReviewClinical epidemiology2021

Measuring Medication Adherence in a Population-Based Asthma Administrative Pharmacy Database: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Michael Asamoah-Boaheng, Kwadwo Osei Bonsu, Jamie Farrell, Alwell Oyet, William K Midodzi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Methods to assess COPD medications adherence in healthcare databases: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Medication adherence in patients with nontuberculous mycobacterial disease.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Michael Asamoah-BoahengFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9632-6878
Kwadwo Osei BonsuSchool of Pharmacy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.
Jamie FarrellFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1719-8477
Alwell OyetDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.
William K MidodziFaculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLimited studies have systematically reviewed the literature to identify and compare the various database methods and optimal thresholds for measuring medication adherence specific to adolescents and adults with asthma. In the present study, we aim to identify the methods and optimal thresholds for measuring medication adherence in population-based pharmacy databases.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), Web of Science, Google Scholar, and grey literature from January 1, 1998, to March 16, 2021. Two independent reviewers screened the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the studies. A quantitative knowledge synthesis was employed.

resultsThirty-eight (38) retrospective cohort studies were eligible. This review identified 20 methods for measuring medication adherence in adolescent and adult asthma administrative health records. Two measures namely the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) were commonly reported in 87% of the literature included in this study. From the meta-analysis, asthma patients who achieved adherence threshold of "0.75-1.00" [OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.77] and ">0.5" [OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.94] were less likely to experience asthma exacerbation.

conclusionDespite their limitations, the PDC and the MPR still remain the most common measures for assessing adherence in asthma pharmacy claim databases. The evidence synthesis showed that an adherence threshold of at least 0.75 is optimal for classifying adherent and non-adherent asthma patients.

Indexed as

adherence measuresadherence thresholdsadministrative health databasesasthmamedication adherencemeta-analysisreview

Identifiers

PMID34712061
PMCPMC8547830

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.