ArticlePatient preference and adherence2022
Medication Adherence Evaluated Through Electronic Monitors During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown in Switzerland: A Longitudinal Analysis.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medication adherence tools and measures in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review.BMC nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- The differential impact of a 6-Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: During the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown, patients included in the Interprofessional Medication Adherence Program (IMAP) in Switzerland continued to use electronic monitors (EMs) that registered daily drug-dose intake. We aimed to understand to what extent patients' medication implementation (ie, the extent to which the patient took the prescribed medicine), measured with EMs, was impacted by the lockdown. Methods: Patients participating in the IMAP were diagnosed with diabetic kidney disease (DKD), solid cancer, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and miscellaneous long-term diseases (MLTD). Patient implementation was defined through a proxy: if all patient EMs were opened at least once daily, implementation was considered active (=1), and no implementation was considered (=0) otherwise. Implementation before (from December 2019 to March 2020), during (March to June 2020) and after (June to September 2020) the lockdown was compared. Subanalyses were performed according to the patients' diseases. Subanalyses were performed in patients who used at least one EM in 2018-2019 during the same periods (defined as winter, spring and summer). The logistic regression models used to estimate medication implementation according to the period were fitted using generalized estimating equations. Results: In 2020, patient implementation (n = 118) did not differ significantly before versus during (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84-1.15, p = 0.789) and before versus after (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.79-1.06, p = 0.217) the lockdown. These findings remained stable when separately analyzing the implementation of patients with HIV (n = 61), DKD (n = 25) or MLTD (n = 22). Too few patients with cancer were included (n = 10) to interpret the results. In 2019, the implementation of 61/118 (51.7%) patients was significantly lower during summertime versus wintertime (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60-0.89, p = 0.002). Conclusion: Medication implementation remained steady before, during and after the lockdown in 2020. The IMAP before, during and after the lockdown may have supported the adherence of most patients, by ensuring continuity of care during periods of routine disturbances.
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.