Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,887

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Can Treatment Adherence Be Improved by Using Rubin's Four Tendencies Framework to Understand a Patient's Response to Expectations

Open access
Kirk, Jeremy, MacDonald, Anita, Lavender, Paul, Dean, Jessica, Rubin, Gretchen·2017·Biomedicine Hub
DOI 10.1159/000480347
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Within the context of poorer patient outcomes and rising healthcare costs, we need to better understand why many patients do not engage fully with their treatment plan. Movement away from talking about “compliance” towards “adherence” and “concordance” is evidence of a recognition that this is a two-way process. Whilst healthcare professionals expect patients to engage in treatment, equally, patients have expectations (whether positive or negative) of their treatment and their need for engagement. There is a need for an effective method that can specifically target those interventions that will provide the most benefit to individual patients and which, crucially, is easy and inexpensive to administer in everyday practice and widely applicable. Rubin's Four Tendencies model identifies a patient's “response to outer and inner expectations” as a key factor in adherence. The model therefore provides an opportunity to test such a targeted, patient-specific strategy and we present a call to action for research in this area.

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 · 10.1159/000480347

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 10.2147/RMHP.S19801 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1159/000350251 · DOI
  3. 10.3810/pgm.2000.03.940 · DOI
  4. 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.11214.x · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1186/s40248-016-0078-8 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.jad.2017.05.018 · DOI
  7. 10.1155/2017/7589184 · DOI
  8. 10.1186/1471-2458-7-104 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 3,887

Metadata

Authors
Kirk, J., MacDonald, A., Lavender, P., Dean, J., & Rubin, G.
Venue
Biomedicine Hub
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2017-08-29
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
1-12
ISSN
2296-6870 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1159/000480347
OpenAlex
W2746562707
Cited by
3,887
References
29
FWCI
349.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold
Licence

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.