ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Patients' experiences and practices of medication literacy in inflammatory bowel disease: a qualitative study.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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.
- Patient-reported first-use usability of the noncommercial MyTARGET mobile application among adults with inflammatory bowel disease: a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
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
Background: Medication literacy is critical for the safe and effective use of medications. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) face complex and evolving medication regimens. However, little is known about medication literacy in this population. This study aimed to explore the experiences and practices of patients with IBD to characterize their current level of medication literacy. Methods: A descriptive qualitative research design was adopted. From November 2024 to January 2025, adult patients with IBD were recruited using purposive sampling at a tertiary hospital in China. One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with the patients. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Results: Qualitative analysis of 16 patients revealed the following characteristics across the five core competencies of medication literacy: (1) Accessing medication information: patients were able to obtain information through various channels, primarily healthcare professionals and the internet, but they were not always proactive in seeking it. (2) Understanding medication information: patients knew the names and dosages of their medications, but their understanding of the reasons for long-term use, treatment-plan adjustments, and monitoring indicators was relatively superficial. (3) Communicating medication information: patients were able to talk with healthcare professionals, but their involvement in shared decision-making was limited and they rarely communicated with fellow patients. (4) Evaluating medication information: patients assessed the credibility of information according to the authority of the source, yet found it difficult to judge accuracy on the basis of their own knowledge. (5) Calculating medication information: patients demonstrated strong ability in calculating dosing times and amounts, although they occasionally relied on external tools to ensure accuracy. Conclusion: Patients with IBD demonstrate a basic level of medication literacy but face challenges across all five dimensions of medication information processing. Findings of this study highlight key components of medication literacy that require development and may provide a foundation for designing targeted assessments and personalized health education programs.
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.