Cited by 226Medication Adherence and CompliancePharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesPharmacy and Medical Practices

A conceptual framework to study medication adherence in older adults

MURRAY, M·2004·The American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy

Abstract

Background Adults aged > or =50 years often have multiple chronic diseases requiring multiple medications. However, even drugs with well-documented benefits are often not taken as prescribed, for a variety of reasons. Objective The objective of this article was to provide background information about medication adherence and its measurement, the development of the conceptual model for use in adherence research, and supportive intervention strategies such as pharmaceutical care by pharmacists to improve chronic medication use in older adults. Methods English-language literature published from 1990 to 2000 was searched on MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and AARP Ageline using the terms aged, heart failure, CHF, adherence, chronic heart failure, compliance, and related terms. The authors used their personal files and libraries to obtain seminal literature and textbooks published before 1990. Results Although the cognitive processes needed to manage and take medications decline with aging, the number of prescription and nonprescription medications consumed increases. Other factors such as vision, hearing, health literacy, disability, and social and financial resources may all complicate the ability of older adults to adhere to the pharmacologic prescription. Conclusions Many factors are associated with medication adherence and related health outcomes in older adults. Therefore, strategies to improve adherence will need to be multidimensional, including improvements in pharmacy services that consider age-related factors (eg, declining cognitive and physical functions) as well as a variety of environmental and social factors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1543-5946(04)90005-0

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MURRAY, M.
Affiliations
Regenstrief Institute (US)
Corresponding author
MURRAY, M
Venue
The American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-03
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
36-43
ISSN
1543-5946 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985265935
Cited by
222
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 15
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG007631, R01AG019105)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL069399)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
Keywords
medication adherence, older adults, chronic heart failure, polypharmacy, pharmaceutical care, pharmacists, conceptual model, health literacy, cognitive decline, adherence measurement
MeSH terms
Aged, Aging, Drug Therapy, Nonprescription Drugs, Heart Failure, Humans, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Pharmaceutical Services, Drug Prescriptions, Socioeconomic Factors, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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