ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Smart Blister System with and without Mobile App Support: A Randomized Controlled Usability Trial.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Medication non-adherence remains a major barrier to effective long-term disease management. Smart packaging technologies offer digital solutions to monitor and support adherence. This study evaluated the usability and feasibility of a smart blister pack (Cerepak Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 36 participants were assigned to use the smart blister pack either with the mobile adherence app (intervention) or without the app (control) over eight weeks, simulating twice-daily medication intake. Usability was assessed using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and user experience surveys. Semi-structured interviews explored user satisfaction, barriers, and suggestions for improvement. Adherence was measured electronically and via pill counts. Results: Usability scores were significantly higher in the intervention group (median SUS: 80.0) compared to the control group (67.5; p = 0.0007). Participants appreciated the packaging's visual layout and the app's reminder and tracking features. Qualitative findings highlighted improved structure, motivation, and ease of use with the app, alongside technical and packaging challenges. Electronic adherence was 91.7% in the app group and 86.2% in the non-app group. Pill count adherence was 96.4% and 88.0%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed. Intermittent data capture issues associated with the smart blister pack led to minor performance inconsistencies in 10.4% of packages, which were accounted for in the analysis, ensuring data integrity. Conclusion: The smart blister pack is usable and feasible for daily medication taking and tracking, particularly when supported by a mobile app. These findings support further research into clinical populations and long-term implementation studies.
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.