ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2026
Transparent reporting of group-based trajectory modeling to study medication adherence: Practical considerations and common pitfalls.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2026. 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.
- Real-World Adherence Patterns and Predictors of GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Use for Obesity Management in a Medicaid Population.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Factors associated with longitudinal hydroxyurea adherence trajectories among individuals with sickle cell disease in Texas Medicaid: A group-based trajectory modeling study.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medication adherence is dynamic and varies over time, yet many studies use the proportion of days covered as a static measure summarized across the entire observation period, which can obscure meaningful changes in adherence behavior over time. Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) has become an increasingly popular method for examining longitudinal adherence patterns and for identifying distinct subgroups of individuals with similar medication-taking behavior. Although this approach provides important advantages, it also introduces additional methodological complexity that has implications for reproducibility, interpretation, and bias. This Viewpoint article provides practical guidance for researchers, clinicians, editors, and peer reviewers who evaluate or apply GBTM to study medication adherence. We describe common modeling decisions, including selecting the time scale, choosing between binary or continuous adherence measures, determining the number and shape of trajectories, and handling enrollment requirements, while highlighting the benefits and limitations associated with each approach. We also identify major threats to study validity, including selection bias from restrictive continuous enrollment criteria, immortal time bias, and reverse causality. To support transparency and consistency in reporting, we summarize key components that should be documented in manuscripts using GBTM. In sum, we aim to strengthen the quality of evidence informed by medication adherence 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.