ArticlePloS one2025
Insignificant difference in medication adherence to dyslipidemia drugs between visually impaired and non-disabled people in South Korea: A nationwide cohort study using claims records.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Incidence of visual impairment (VI) and dyslipidemia is increasing with aging. Although good medication adherence (MA) is a crucial factor in achieving therapeutic goals for dyslipidemia, there is a paucity of studies measuring MA in the visually impaired with dyslipidemia. We investigated whether patients with VI had worse MA to dyslipidemia drugs than non-disabled people and determined the factors affecting MA among patients with VI. Data on dyslipidemia patients with VI were extracted in 2017 from the sample cohort database of the National Health Insurance Service. MA to dyslipidemia drugs was measured for two years based on the proportion of days covered (PDC). Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the effect of VI on good MA (PDC ≥0.8). The VI group (0.860) had a larger PDC than the non-disabled group (0.850). The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for good MA among VI vs. non-disabled individuals was statistically insignificant (1.137, 95% confidence interval:0.958-1.350). Significant factors for poor MA in the VI group were younger age (aOR for 20-39 vs. ≥75 years old: 0.124), lower income (aOR for 9-10th decile (rich) vs. 1-4th decile (poor): 1.771), shorter duration of dyslipidemia (aOR for 1-4 vs. 15 years: 0.416), having lower-level providers sas their main providers (aOR for clinics vs. general/tertiary-care hospitals: 0.545), and having mental diseases (aOR: 0.679). Patients with VI did not have worse MA than non-disabled patients taking dyslipidemia medication.
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.