Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 237

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Time to stop counting the tablets?

Pullar, Thomas, Kumar, Shubha, Tindall, Hilary, Feely, Morgan·1989·Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Abstract

We attempted to assess compliance using both a pharmacologic indicator (low-dose phenobarbital) and a return tablet count in 225 patients who were taking part in three separate studies. There were 216 patients (96%) who kept a follow-up appointment after 28 days; 161 patients appeared to have good compliance (90% to 109%) by return tablet count. Of these 161 patients, 51 (32%) had plasma phenobarbital concentrations (corrected for dose and weight) that were less than 90% of the lowest value previously found in normal volunteers, which suggested poorer compliance. When compared with the age-related volunteer values, 77 (48%) had values that were less than 90% of the lowest volunteer value. There were 6 of 10 patients with apparently excessive (greater than or equal to 110%) compliance by return tablet count and 4 of 12 who failed to return their container who also had phenobarbital concentrations that were less than 90% of the lowest volunteer value. We concluded that return tablet count grossly overestimates compliance.

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

Crossref · 10.1038/clpt.1989.121

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 237

Metadata

Authors
Pullar, T., Kumar, S., Tindall, H., & Feely, M.
Venue
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1989-08
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
163-168
ISSN
  • 0009-9236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-6535
OpenAlex
W2008454003
Cited by
237
References
0
FWCI
9.13
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Time to stop counting the tablets? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/clpt.1989.121
The paper
Pullar, T., Kumar, S., Tindall, H., & Feely, M. (1989). Time to stop counting the tablets? Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.1989.121

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.