CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 868Medication Adherence and CompliancePatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePharmacy and Medical Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking

Pound, Pandora, Britten, Nicky, Morgan, Myfanwy, Yardley, Lucy, Pope, Catherine, Daker-White, Gavin, Campbell, Rona·2005·Social Science & Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.063
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The study aimed to synthesise qualitative studies of lay experiences of medicine taking. Most studies focused on the experience of those not taking their medicine as prescribed, with few considering those who reject their medicines or accept them uncritically. Most were concerned with medicines for chronic illnesses. The synthesis revealed widespread caution about taking medicines and highlighted the lay practice of testing medicines, mainly for adverse effects. Some concerns about medicines cannot be resolved by lay evaluation, however, including worries about dependence, tolerance and addiction, the potential harm from taking medicines on a long-term basis and the possibility of medicines masking other symptoms. Additionally, in some cases medicines had a significant impact on identity, presenting problems of disclosure and stigma. People were found to accept their medicines either passively or actively, or to reject them. Some were coerced into taking medicines. Active accepters might modify their regimens by taking medicines symptomatically or strategically, or by adjusting doses to minimise unwanted consequences, or to make the regimen more acceptable. Many modifications appeared to reflect a desire to minimise the intake of medicines and this was echoed in some peoples' use of non-pharmacological treatments to either supplant or supplement their medicines. Few discussed regimen changes with their doctors. We conclude that the main reason why people do not take their medicines as prescribed is not because of failings in patients, doctors or systems, but because of concerns about the medicines themselves. On the whole, the findings point to considerable reluctance to take medicine and a preference to take as little as possible. We argue that peoples' resistance to medicine taking needs to be recognised and that the focus should be on developing ways of making medicines safe, as well as identifying and evaluating the treatments that people often choose in preference to medicines.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.063

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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 69 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ernst, 2000, Prevalence of use of complementary/alternative medicine, Bulletin of the World Health Organisation, 78, 252
  2. Halkitis, 1999, Self-strategies as means of enhancing adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapies, Journal of the New York State Nurses Association, 30, 22

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 860

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pound, P., Britten, N., Morgan, M., Yardley, L., Pope, C., Daker-White, G., & Campbell, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Campbell, Rona
ORCID
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-07
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
133-155
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.063
OpenAlex
W2103844098
Cited by
868
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 48
FWCI
31.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
Keywords
non-compliance, chronic disease, adverse drug reactions, symptom masking, non-pharmacological treatment, patient-physician communication, drug safety
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Self Administration, Treatment Refusal, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

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