ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Examining usability of RxFill: integrating health IT to support medication adherence.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
Abstract
backgroundOver 50% of patients do not take their medications as prescribed or are non-adherent. Primary care providers are well positioned to address non-adherence. However, current methods for obtaining adherence are unreliable. RxFill integrates prescription medication fill status and dispense dates from community pharmacies into clinic electronic health records (EHRs). The goal of this study was to examine RxFill usability during a simulated case with primary care providers.
methodsThe study took place at an academic health system that implemented RxFill in June 2022. Participants were asked to review a simulated patient chart and "think aloud." After, a semi-structured interview elicited attitudes towards RxFill, including usability. Participants also completed the System Usability Scale (SUS), which scores the functionality on a scale of 0-100. Think-aloud commentary and interview transcripts were analyzed via qualitative content analysis.
resultsEight providers participated in the study. The average SUS score was 81.25, generally considered "Acceptable." Qualitative themes included RxFill usefulness, ease of use, and fit into current workload. Participants reported RxFill data was useful to estimate patient adherence, however, running reports for each medication was time intensive. Participants had minimal time to review patient charts prior to appointments, which would limit their ability to use RxFill in practice.
conclusionsRxFill data, although useful, was not entirely easy to use and did not fit into participants' current workload. Institutions implementing RxFill should make dispense dates and fill indicators easy to access and consider workload and integration into other health IT systems. Additionally, RxFill use is limited by community pharmacy adoption and the ability to send fill data. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.