ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2024
Inconclusiveness of psychometric testing of medication adherence questionnaires.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo propose a paradigm change for the validation procedures of medication adherence questionnaires.
methodsA total of 121 validation procedures of unique questionnaires for medication adherence were analyzed.
results"Construct validity" and "internal consistency" were most often assessed, and test results varied largely. A more in-depth analysis indicated that the assessment of medication non-adherence included distinct but related constructs, such as the extent to which doses are missed, and the attempt to identify different facets of medication-taking behavior. Consequently, each construct requires a different measurement approach with different psychometric tests for establishing its validity and reliability.
conclusionResults show that assessing the validity and reliability of adherence questionnaires with standard procedures including statistical tests is inconclusive. Refinement of the constructs of non-adherence is needed in pharmacy and medical practice. We suggest a distinction between the (i) extent of missed doses over the past 2 weeks, (ii) modifiable reasons for non-adherence behavior, and (iii) unmodifiable factors of non-adherence. Validation procedures and corresponding statistical methods should be selected according to the specific single constructs.
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.