Cited by 134Healthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsMedication Adherence and Compliance

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Text messaging reminders to reduce non-attendance in chronic disease follow-up: a clinical trial

Open access
Liew, Su-May, Tong, Seng Fah, Mun Lee, Verna Kar, Ng, Chirk Jenn, Leong, Kwok Chi, Teng, Cheong Lieng·2009·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-attendance results in administrative problems and disruption in patient care. Several interventions have been used to reduce non-attendance, with varying degree of success. A relatively new intervention, text messaging, has been shown to be as effective as telephone reminders in reducing non-attendance. However, no study has looked specifically at using text messaging reminders to reduce non-attendance in chronic disease care. AIM: To determine if text messaging would be effective in reducing non-attendance in patients on long-term followup, compared with telephone reminders and no reminder. DESIGN OF STUDY: A randomised controlled trial with three arms: text messaging reminder, telephone reminder, and control. SETTING: Two primary care clinics in Malaysia. METHOD: A total of 931 subjects who had been on at least 6 months of follow-up were randomised into the three groups. Demographic variables were recorded at the first visit. In the intervention arms, a reminder was sent 24–48 hours prior to the appointment. Non-attendance rate was documented at the second visit. Non-attenders were defined as those who did not attend, attended early, or attended late without rescheduling their appointment. Attenders were defined as participants who had turned up for their scheduled appointment and those who had changed or cancelled their appointment with notification. RESULTS: The non-attendance rates in the text messaging group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41 to 0.93, P = 0.020) and the telephone reminder group (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.81), P = 0.003) were significantly lower than the control group. The absolute non-attendance rate for telephone reminders was lower by 2% compared to the text messaging group. This difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.505). CONCLUSION: Text messaging was found to be as effective as telephone reminder in reducing non-attendance in patients who required long-term follow-up for their chronic illnesses in this study. It could be used as an alternative to conventional reminder systems.

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 · 10.3399/bjgp09x472250

Cites

20 of 20 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

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?

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

Show all 20 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Patel, 2007, The use of a text messaging service to improve attendance at a sickle cell clinic (poster presentations: red cell disorders), Br J Haematol, 137, 31
  2. Malik, 2007, Towards a better outpatient service in inflammatory bowel disease, Gut, 56, A17

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Liew, S.-M., Tong, S. F., Mun Lee, V. K., Ng, C. J., Leong, K. C., & Teng, C. L.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • University of Malaya (MY)
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • IMU University (MY)
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2009-12-01
Volume
59
Issue
569
Pages
916-920
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2021342127
Cited by
134
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
FWCI
11.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The University of Malaya Research Repository (University of Malaya) (submittedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Universiti Malaya
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
appointment non-attendance, SMS reminders, telephone reminders, chronic disease follow-up, primary care, appointment scheduling, reminder systems, patient attendance
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Primary Health Care, Reminder Systems, Cell Phone

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