ArticleClinical and translational allergy2023
Measuring adherence to inhaled control medication in patients with asthma: Comparison among an asthma app, patient self-report and physician assessment.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2023. 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.
- Interventions Evaluated to Improve Inhaler Adherence in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Scoping Review.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Article
- Real-world use of inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol as needed in adults with mild asthma: the PRIME study.ERJ open research · 2024Article
- Measuring adherence to inhaled control medication in patients with asthma: Comparison among an asthma app, patient self-report and physician assessment.Clinical and translational allergy · 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
44 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated the feasibility of using an asthma app to support medication management and adherence but failed to compare with other measures currently used in clinical practice. However, in a clinical setting, any additional adherence measurement must be evaluated in the context of both the patient and physician perspectives so that it can also help improve the process of shared decision making. Thus, we aimed to compare different measures of adherence to asthma control inhalers in clinical practice, namely through an app, patient self-report and physician assessment.
methodsThis study is a secondary analysis of three prospective multicentre observational studies with patients (≥13 years old) with persistent asthma recruited from 61 primary and secondary care centres in Portugal. Patients were invited to use the InspirerMundi app and register their inhaled medication. Adherence was measured by the app as the number of doses taken divided by the number of doses scheduled each day and two time points were considered for analysis: 1-week and 1-month. At baseline, patients and physicians independently assessed adherence to asthma control inhalers during the previous week using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS 0-100).
resultsA total of 193 patients (72% female; median [P25-P75] age 28 [19-41] years old) were included in the analysis. Adherence measured by the app was lower (1 week: 31 [0-71]%; 1 month: 18 [0-48]%) than patient self-report (80 [60-95]) and physician assessment (82 [51-94]) (p < 0.001). A negligible non-significant correlation was found between the app and subjective measurements (ρ 0.118-0.156, p > 0.05). There was a moderate correlation between patient self-report and physician assessment (ρ = 0.596, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAdherence measured by the app was lower than that reported by the patient or the physician. This was expected as objective measurements are commonly lower than subjective evaluations, which tend to overestimate adherence. Nevertheless, the low adherence measured by the app may also be influenced by the use of the app itself and this needs to be considered in future studies.
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.