Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 382

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Recall of Recommendations and Adherence to Advice Among Patients With Chronic Medical Conditions

Richard L. Kravitz·1993·Archives of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient adherence to treatment regimens may be a critical mediator between physician recommendations and patient outcomes, but levels of adherence have not been compared across disease groups, and patient self-reports have not been well validated. METHODS: To determine recall of and adherence to physicians' recommendations among patients with chronic medical conditions and to measure the correspondence between self-reported adherence and disease activity, we analyzed data from the Medical Outcomes Study. A total of 1751 patients with diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and heart disease were identified among 20,223 patients visiting family physicians, general internists, cardiologists, and endocrinologists in 1986. Main outcome measures included recall of 15 disease-specific recommendations, self-reported general and specific adherence, and correlations between adherence and clinical measures of disease activity and control. RESULTS: Among patients in all three disease groups, the proportion recalling recommendations to take prescribed medications (> or = 90%) exceeded the fraction recalling recommendations to follow a restricted diet, exercise regularly, and perform various self-care activities (22% to 84%). Adherence to recalled recommendations was similar across conditions but varied markedly according to the nature of the recommendations; for example, 91% of diabetics took prescribed medications but 69% followed a diabetics diet and 19% engaged in regular exercise. Adherence to recommendations was correlated with reduced serum glucose (r = -.33) and glycohemoglobin (r = -.25) levels among insulin-dependent diabetics and with reduced diastolic blood pressure among patients with hypertension (r = -.15). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of chronically ill patients failed to recall elements of potentially important medical advice and did not always adhere to advice that was recalled. Self-reported adherence was correlated with clinical measures of disease activity and control. Additional research is needed not only to improve adherence to medical advice in patients with chronic illnesses but also to determine which life-style changes are truly beneficial for these patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1001/archinte.153.16.1869

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kravitz, R. L.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Publisher
American Medical Association
Published
1993-08-23
Volume
153
Issue
16
Pages
1869-1869
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985288472
Cited by
382
References
2
FWCI
7.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.