Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 458

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A General Method of Compliance Assessment Using Centralized Pharmacy Records: Description and Validation

Steiner, John F., Koepsell, Thomas D., Fihn, Stephan D., Inui, Thomas S.·1988·Medical Care

Abstract

The prescription refill records of centralized pharmacies are a potential source of information about patient compliance with long-term medications. We developed a method for assessing compliance in such settings and validated our measures using pharmacy data and clinical information from patients with seizure disorders and hypertension. For patients taking the anticonvulsant medication phenytoin, compliance with the drug correlated significantly with mean plasma phenytoin level. For patients on antihypertensive medications, compliance with the treatment regimen correlated with control of diastolic blood pressure. Many patients (15% in the phenytoin validation, and 33% in the blood pressure validation) obtained substantial oversupplies of medications; for these patients, the direct relationship between compliance and drug effect was not evident. A majority of seizure patients with "subtherapeutic" mean plasma phenytoin levels were identified as noncompliant using our measures. We conclude that our method of assessing compliance in obtaining medications is feasible in "managed care" settings, appears to be a valid correlate of drug effects, and may be useful in research and patient care.

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 · 10.1097/00005650-198808000-00007

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

Metadata

Authors
Steiner, J. F., Koepsell, T. D., Fihn, S. D., & Inui, T. S.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
1988-08
Volume
26
Issue
8
Pages
814-823
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015338056
Cited by
458
References
0
FWCI
3.90
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

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.