Cited by 889Medication Adherence and CompliancePharmacy and Medical PracticesSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

Methods for measuring and monitoring medication regimen adherence in clinical trials and clinical practice

Farmer, Kevin C.·1999·Clinical Therapeutics

Abstract

Researchers and clinicians have used numerous methods in their attempts to adequately assess patient compliance (adherence) with medication regimens and to identify noncompliant patients. Large variations have been reported in the extent of noncompliance in individual patients and large populations. In addition, nonadherence has often been poorly defined. Direct measures of adherence include drug assays of blood or urine, use of drug markers with the target medication, and direct observation of the patient receiving the medication. Indirect measures of adherence imply that the medication has been used by the patient; these measures include various forms of self-reporting by the patient, medication measurement (pill count), use of electronic monitoring devices, and review of prescription records and claims. Compliance measures should be assessed on the basis of their validity (sensitivity and specificity or statistical correlation) and the reference standard used. Many early studies used pill counts as a reference standard, but electronic monitoring devices such as the Medication Event Monitoring System have replaced pill counts as the reference standard. The choice of a method for measuring adherence to a medication regimen should be based on the usefulness and reliability of the method in light of the researcher's or clinician's goals. Specific methods may be more applicable to certain situations, depending on the type of adherence being assessed, the precision required, and the intended application of the results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0149-2918(99)80026-5

Cites

55 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Rogers, 1995, Prescription medicine compliance: A review of the baseline of knowledge, 1
  2. Gregoire, 1998, Measurement of noncompliance to antihypertensive medication using pill counts and pharmacy records, J Soc Adm Pharm, 14, 198

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Farmer, K. C.
Affiliations
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center (US)
Corresponding author
Farmer, Kevin C.
Venue
Clinical Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-06
Volume
21
Issue
6
Pages
1074-1090
ISSN
0149-2918 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1972110417
Cited by
889
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 62 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 42
FWCI
7.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
medication adherence, medication non-adherence, adherence measurement methods, pill count, electronic medication monitoring, medication event monitoring system, self-report, prescription records, clinical trials
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Drug Administration Schedule, Humans, Patient Compliance, Drug Monitoring

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