CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 257Medication Adherence and CompliancePatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePharmacy and Medical Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What’s in a name? Compliance, adherence and concordance in chronic psychiatric disorders

Open access
Chakrabarti, Subho·2014·World Journal of Psychiatry
DOI 10.5498/wjp.v4.i2.30PMC PMC4087153
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

About half or more of the patients with chronic psychiatric illnesses, either do not take their medications correctly, or completely stop taking them. The problem of poor initial compliance or adherence is often compounded by a continued decline in compliance/adherence over time. The failure to take medicines, adversely affects the outcome of treatment, and places a huge burden of wasted resources on the society. Three terms have been used to describe medication-taking among patients with chronic psychiatric disorders. Compliance is defined as "the extent to which the patient's behaviour matches the prescriber's recommendations". Though compliance has been frequently employed to describe medication-taking behaviour, it has proved problematic because it refers to a process where the clinician decides on a suitable treatment, which the patient is expected to comply with unquestioningly. Studies over the past few decades have emphasized the importance of patients' perspectives in medication-taking, based on their own beliefs, their personal circumstances, the information and resources available for them. Adherence has been used as a replacement for compliance in an effort to place the clinician-patient relationship in its proper perspective. Adherence refers to a process, in which the appropriate treatment is decided after a proper discussion with the patient. It also implies that the patient is under no compulsion to accept a particular treatment, and is not to be held solely responsible for the occurrence of non-adherence. Adherence has been defined as "the extent to which a person's behaviour, taking medication, following a diet, and/or executing lifestyle changes, corresponds with agreed recommendations from a health care provider". To overcome certain problems in the concept of adherence, a third term concordance has been used. The concept of concordance has evolved from a narrower view, emphasizing an agreement between the clinician and the patient, which takes into account each other's perspective on medication-taking, to a broader process consisting of open discussions with the patient regarding medication-taking, imparting information and supporting patients on long-term medication. It is a process, which entertains patients' views on medication-taking, and acknowledges that patients' views have to be respected even if they make choices, which appear to be in conflict with the clinician's views. Although none of these terms are ideal solutions to understanding the complex process of medication-taking behaviour of patients, the move from compliance to adherence and concordance represents genuine progress in this field, which puts the patient's perceptions at the centre of the whole process.

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 · 10.5498/wjp.v4.i2.30

Cites

59 of 59 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 62 references

3 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Leo RJ, Jassal K, Bakhai YD. Non-adherence with psychopharmacologic treatment among psychiatric patients. Primary Psychiatry 2005;12:33-34.
  2. 10.1176/appi.ps.62.8.888 · DOI
  3. Haynes RB, Taylor DW, Sackett DL. Compliance in health care Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1979;.
  4. Fink DL. Tailoring the consensual regimen. Compliance with therapeutic regimens Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press; 1976;110-118.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Chakrabarti, S.
Affiliations
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (IN)
Corresponding author
Chakrabarti, Subho
ORCID
Chakrabarti, Subho
Venue
World Journal of Psychiatry
Publisher
Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
Published
2014
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
30
ISSN
2220-3206 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5498/wjp.v4.i2.30
PMC
PMC4087153
OpenAlex
W2005695245
Cited by
257
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6
FWCI
8.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • World Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
Keywords
medication adherence, concordance, chronic mental illness, psychiatric medication, patient perspectives, clinician-patient relationship, medication-taking behavior, medication beliefs

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