CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16Medication Adherence and ComplianceMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsEthics in Clinical Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Desirability and feasibility of wireless electronic monitoring of medications in clinical trials

Open access
Robiner, William N., Flaherty, Nancy, Fossum, Thyra A., Nevins, Thomas E.·2015·Translational Behavioral Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s13142-015-0316-1PMC PMC4537458
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Medication nonadherence is a vexing problem in health care necessitating patients and health professionals' efforts to prevent, minimize, or reverse it. Research participants' inconsistent medication taking obscures treatment efficacy and adds costs to biomedical research. Electronic monitoring devices (EMDs), like the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS), have grown in sophistication, providing precise, timely insights into individuals' medication-taking patterns across clinical populations. This article reports on the desirability and feasibility study of using a wireless EMD in clinical research to promote adherence to clinical regimens and research protocols. Nonadherence in transplant patients has been linked to late acute rejection and graft loss. High levels of adherence (97.7 %) were documented for six renal transplant recipients for a mean of 6 months (M = 196.1 ± 71.2 days) who indicated acceptance of the technology. MEMS data confirmed the feasibility of using wireless EMDs to monitor medication use. Monitoring provides greater assurance that research studies reflect the biological impact of medications and provide a basis for targeting adherence enhancement efforts within research investigations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13142-015-0316-1

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. Rand CS, Sevick MA. Ethics in adherence promotion and monitoring. Control Clin Trials. 2000; 21: S241S-247S. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00085-4 . · DOI
  2. Ellis S, Shumaker S, Sieber W, et al. Adherence to pharmacological interventions: current trends and future directions. Control Clin Trials. 2000; 21: S218-225. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00082-9 . · DOI
  3. Robiner WN. Enhancing adherence in clinical research. Contemp Clin Trials. 2005; 26: 59-77. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2004.11.015 . · DOI
  4. Urquhart J. Role of patient compliance in clinical pharmacokinetics: Review of recent research. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1994; 27: 202-15. · DOI
  5. Sabate E, ed. Adherence to long-term therapies: Evidence for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
  6. DiMatteo MR. Variations in Patients' Adherence to Medical Recommendations: A Quantitative Review of 50 Years of Research. Med Care. 2004; 42(3): 200-209. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000114908.90348.f9 . · DOI · Paper page
  7. Dew MA, DiMartini AF, De Vito Dabbs A, et al. Rates and risk factors for nonadherence to the medical regimen after adult solid organ transplantation. Transplantation. 2007; 83: 58-73. doi: 10.1097/01.tp.0000258599.65257.a6 . · DOI
  8. Nevins TE, Kruse L, Skeans MA, et al. The natural history of azathioprine compliance after renal transplantation. Kidney Int. 2001; 60: 1565-1570. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00961.x . · DOI
  9. Dobbels, F., & De Geest, S. (2011). How to identify nonadherence to immunosuppressive medication in organ transplant recipients? Current insights and future challenges. Compliance in solid organ transplantation. In J. M. Grinyo, (Ed.), International Transplantation Updates 2011, 1-19.
  10. Constantiner M, Cukor D. Barriers to immunosuppressive medication adherence in high-risk adult renal transplant recipients. Dial Transplant. 2011; 40(2): 60-66. doi: 10.1002/dat.20536 . · DOI
  11. Hansen R, Seifeldin R, Noe L. Medication adherence in chronic disease: issues in posttransplant immunosuppression. Transplant Proc. 2007; 39: 1287-1300. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2007.02.074 . · DOI
  12. Pinsky BW, Takemoto SK, Lentine KL, et al. Transplant outcomes and economic costs associated with patient noncompliance to immunosuppression. Am J Transplant. 2009; 9: 2597-2606. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02798.x . · DOI
  13. Azvolinsky A. Mystery around drug adherence still plagues medical literature. Nat Med. 2014; 20: 455. doi: 10.1038/nm0514-455 . · DOI
  14. Blaschke TF, Osterberg L, Vrijens B, et al. Adherence to medications: Insights arising from studies on the unreliable link between prescribed and actual drug dosing histories. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2012; 52: 275-301. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-011711-113247 . · DOI
  15. Hughes DA, Bagust A, Haycox A, et al. The impact of non-compliance on the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceuticals: A review of the literature. Health Econ. 2001; 10: 601-15. doi: 10.1002/hec.609 . · DOI
  16. Zhang Z, Peluso MJ, Gross CP, et al. Adherence reporting in randomized controlled trials. Clin Trials. 2014; 11: 195-204. doi: 10.1177/1740774513512565 . · DOI
  17. Lasagna L, Hutt PB. Health care, research, and regulatory impact of noncompliance. In: Cramer JA, Spilker B, eds. Patient compliance in medical practice and clinical trials. New York: Raven Press; 1991: 393-403.
  18. Cramer JA, Spilker B, eds. Patient compliance in medical practice and clinical trials. New York: Raven Press; 1991.
  19. Davis CE. Prerandomization compliance screening: a statistician’s view. In: Shumaker SA, Schron EB, Ockene JK, McBee WL, eds. The handbook of health behavior change. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1998: 485-90.
  20. Probstfield JL, Russell ML, Henske JC, et al. A successful program for returning dropouts to a clinical trial. Am J Med. 1986; 80: 777-84. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(80)90026-4 . · DOI
  21. Spilker B, Cramer JA. Patient recruitment in clinical trials. New York: Raven Press; 1992.
  22. Williams AB, Amico KR, Bova C, et al. A proposal for quality standards for measuring medication adherence in research. AIDS Behav. 2013; 14: 284-297. doi: 10.1007/s10461-012-0172-7 . · DOI
  23. Riekert KA, Rand CS. Electronic monitoring of medication adherence: When is high-tech best? J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2002; 9: 25-34. doi: 10.1023/A:1014131928789 . · DOI
  24. Green CA. What can patient health education coordinators learn from ten years of compliance research? Patient Educ Couns. 1987; 10: 167-174. · DOI
  25. Matsui D. Medication adherence issues in patients: Focus on cost. Clin Audit. 2013; 5: 33-42. doi: 10.2147/CA.S30125 . · DOI
  26. Cramer JA. Microelectronic systems for monitoring and enhancing patient compliance with medication regimens. Drugs. 1995; 49: 597-605. · DOI
  27. Zeller A, Ramseier E, Teagtmeyer A, et al. Patients' self-reported adherence to cardiovascular medication using electronic monitors as comparators. Hypertens Res. 2008; 31: 2037-2043. doi: 10.1291/hypres.31.2037 . · DOI
  28. van den Boogaard J, Lyimo RA, Boeree MJ, et al. Electronic monitoring of treatment adherence and validation of alternative adherence measures in tuberculosis patients: a pilot study. Bull World Health Organ. 2011; 89: 632-639. doi: 10.2471/BLT.11.086462 . · DOI
  29. Denhaerynck K, Schäfer-Keller P, Young J, et al. Examining assumptions regarding valid electronic monitoring of medication therapy: development of a validation framework and its application on a European sample of kidney transplant patients. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008; 8: 5. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-5 . · DOI
  30. Cook P, Schmiege S, McClean M, et al. Practical and analytic issues in the electronic assessment of adherence. West J Nurs Res. 2012; 34: 598-620. doi: 10.1177/0193945911427153 . · DOI
  31. Ingerski LM, Hente EA, Modi AC, et al. Electronic Measurement of medication adherence in pediatric chronic illness: A review of measures. J Pediatr. 2011; 159: 528-534. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2011.05.018 . · DOI
  32. Wu J-R, Corley DJ, Lennie TA, et al. Effect of a medication-taking behavior feedback, theory-based intervention on outcomes in patients with heart failure. J Card Fail. 2012; 18: 1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2011.09.006 . · DOI
  33. Haberer JE, Robbins GK, Ybarra M, et al. Real-time electronic adherence monitoring is feasible, comparable to unannounced pill counts, and acceptable. AIDS Behav. 2012; 16: 375-382. doi: 10.1007/s10461-011-9933-y . · DOI
  34. Carver CS, Scheier MF. Control processes and self-organization as complementary principles underlying behavior. Personal Soc Psychol Rev. 2002; 6: 304-315. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0604_05 . · DOI
  35. Leventhal H, Leventhal EA, Contrada RJ. Self-regulation, health, and behavior: A perceptual-cognitive approach. Psychol Health. 1998; 13: 717-733. doi: 10.1080/08870449808407425 . · DOI
  36. Ryan, R. M., Patrick, H., Deci, E. L., & Williams, G. C. Facilitating health behaviour change and its maintenance: Interventions based on Self-Determination Theory. Eur Health Psychol. 2008; 10, 2-5. 26.
  37. Goetz, T. (201). The decision tree: How to make better choices and take control of your health. NY: Rodale Press.
  38. Nevins TE, Robiner WN, Thomas W. Predictive patterns of early medication adherence in renal transplantation. Transplantation. 2014; 98: 878-84. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000000148 . · DOI
  39. Vitolins MZ, Rand CS, Rapp SR, et al. Measuring adherence to behavioral and medical interventions. Control Clin Trials. 2000; 21: 188S-194S. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00077-5 . · DOI
  40. Bellg AJ, Borrelli B, Resnick B, et al. Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: Best practices and recommendations from the NIH Behavior Change Consortium. Health Psychol. 2004; 23: 443-451. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.23.5.443 . · DOI · Paper page
  41. Zarin DA, Tse T. Trust but verify: Trial registration and determining fidelity to the protocol. Ann Intern Med. 2013; 159: 65-67. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-159-1-201307020-00011 . · DOI
  42. Werner R, Kolstad JT, Stuart EA, et al. The effect of pay-for-performance in hospitals: Lessons for quality improvement. Health Aff. 2011; 30: 690-698. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.1277 . · DOI
  43. Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: Care, health, and cost. Health Aff. 2008; 27: 759-769. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759 . · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 16

Metadata

Authors
Robiner, W. N., Flaherty, N., Fossum, T. A., & Nevins, T. E.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
  • Robiner, William N.
  • Flaherty, Nancy
  • Fossum, Thyra A.
  • Nevins, Thomas E.
ORCID
Robiner, William N.
Venue
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2015-04-07
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
285-293
ISSN
  • 1613-9860 (ISSN-L)
  • 1869-6716
DOI
10.1007/s13142-015-0316-1
PMC
PMC4537458
OpenAlex
W2047272073
Cited by
16
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P01DK013083)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
Keywords
medication adherence, electronic medication monitoring, medication event monitoring system, clinical trials, kidney transplant recipients, graft rejection

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Desirability and feasibility of wireless electronic monitoring of medications in clinical trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s13142-015-0316-1
The paper
Robiner, W. N., Flaherty, N., Fossum, T. A., & Nevins, T. E. (2015). Desirability and feasibility of wireless electronic monitoring of medications in clinical trials. Translational Behavioral Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0316-1