ArticleBMC primary care2024
Opinions and perceptions of patients with cardiovascular disease on adherence: a qualitative study of focus groups.
Article in BMC primary care, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and internal validation of GENADHECAR: a screening instrument for identifying probable statin non-adherence in patients with ischemic heart disease.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Collaborative challenges during transition of patients with severe depression from secondary mental health services to primary care and opportunities for improvement - a qualitative study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Identifying Dimensions and Items for a Questionnaire to Assess Medication Adherence in Men and Women with Ischemic Heart Disease: Insights from the GENADHECAR Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular diseases are becoming more frequent throughout the world. Adherence to both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, as well as lifestyles, is important for good management and control of the disease. This study aims to explore the opinions and perceptions of patients with ischemic heart disease on the difficulties associated with therapeutic adherence.
methodsAn interpretive phenomenological study was carried out using focus groups and one semi-structured interview. The MAXQDA qualitative data analysis program was used for inductive interpretation of the group discourses and interview. Data were coded, and these were grouped by categories and then consolidated under the main themes identified.
resultsTwo in-person focus groups and one remote semi-structured interview were performed. Twelve participants (6 men and 6 women) from the Hospital de San Juan de Alicante participated, two of them being family companions . The main themes identified were aspects related to the individual, heart disease, drug treatment, and the perception of the health care system.
conclusionsAdhering to recommendations on healthy behaviors and taking prescribed medications for cardiovascular disease was important for most participants. However, they sometimes found polypharmacy difficult to manage, especially when they did not perceive the symptoms of their disease. Participants related the concept of fear to therapeutic adherence, believing that the latter increased with the former. The relationship with health professionals was described as optimal, but, nevertheless, the coordination of the health care system was seen as limited.
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.