Trial reportThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2025
Association of medication adherence with treatment preferences: incentivizing truthful self-reporting.
Trial report in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The potential adding therapeutic effect of pentoxifylline and/or folic acid for chronic kidney disease patients: randomized controlled trial.BMC nephrology · 2025Trial
- Patient Preferences for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treatment: A Multi-method Approach Using Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling.The patient · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSelf-reported medication adherence may be influenced by socially desirable answers and untruthful reporting. Misreporting of adherence behavior can bias estimations of treatment (cost)effectiveness. This study investigated how to induce truthful self-reported medication adherence and evaluated how self-reported (truth-induced vs. regularly reported) medication adherence and treatment preferences were associated.
methodsMedication adherence was measured after a discrete choice experiment eliciting stated preferences for Multiple Sclerosis (MS)-treatments. Data was collected among MS-patients in three Western countries. Half of the sample was randomized to 'choice-matching', a novel mechanism which induces truthfulness. It financially compensates respondents based on their self-reported adherence and guesses about other respondents' adherence. To investigate the impact of truth-incentivized adherence reporting on preference heterogeneity, interaction effects between medication adherence and treatment preferences were tested separately within the choice-matching and the 'standard' group.
resultsThe sample comprised 380 MS-patients (mean age 41y, 69% female). Respondents in the choice-matching group reported a lower medication adherence compared to the standard group (always adherent: 39.3% vs. 46.6%). Mixed logit models showed significant interaction effects: in the choice-matching group, higher medication adherence resulted in lower utility for pills twice/day compared to injections three times/week (p = 0.019), while in the standard group, respondents with higher medication adherence preferred pills once/day compared to injections three times/week (p = 0.005).
conclusionChoice-matching likely encouraged respondents to report their true medication adherence. Linking truthful behavior to patients' preferences allows for a better understanding of preference heterogeneity and helping to make decisions that fit patients' true preferences.
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.