SynthesisClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2026
Content Validation of a Medication Adherence Risk Score (MARS) for Mortality Risk Prediction: A Delphi Consensus.
Synthesis in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Medication Adherence Risk Score (MARS) is an objective adherence-based score, derived from transactional dispensary data. This study provides expert consensus to validate the use of the MARS as a predictor of mortality risk. A systematic review and assessment of South African health legislation and professional guidelines informed the development of consensus statements regarding the relevance, validity, predictive power, and implementation feasibility of the MARS. A two-round modified Delphi approach using a 5-point Likert scale was employed. Consensus was reached if at least 80% of respondents selected "agree" or "strongly agree." Nonconsensus statements were revised based on qualitative feedback and subsequently reevaluated in a second round. Thirteen clinical, actuarial, and academic experts were successfully recruited. Consensus was achieved for 20 of the 28 statements in Round 1. Five of 18 (27.8%; risk score components), 1 of 3 (33.3%, validity/predictive power), and 2 of 7 statements (26.5%, real-world implementation) did not initially reach consensus. Nonconsensus statements were revised to provide clarity, after which consensus was achieved for all statements by the end of Round 2. Expert consensus supports the inclusion, exclusion, and weighting of MARS risk factors. The panel agreed that the score offers predictive value for mortality outcomes, and that real-world application for enhancing risk stratification and reducing healthcare costs is feasible. Future statistical analysis is necessary to demonstrate its relationship with mortality risk. Developing practical implementation strategies will facilitate incorporation into clinical practice and public health interventions.
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.