Observational studyCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2014

Lifestyle factors as predictors of nonadherence to statin therapy among patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities.

Heli Halava, Maarit Jaana Korhonen, Risto Huupponen, Soko Setoguchi, Jaana Pentti, Mika Kivimäki, Jussi Vahtera

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2014. The graph read 6 numbers from its abstract, feeding 3 cells of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. It also reports 6 associations that do not count as treatment evidence, such as OR 0.82 (0.74 to 0.92) for body weight & composition. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

6numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Body weight & compositionan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
OR 0.820.74 to 0.92
Obesity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.99), overweight (adjusted OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98) and former smoking (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.92) predicted a reduced risk of nonadherence in this group after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.
Body weight & compositionan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
OR 0.860.74 to 0.99
Obesity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.99), overweight (adjusted OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98) and former smoking (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.92) predicted a reduced risk of nonadherence in this group after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.
Body weight & compositionan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
OR 0.880.79 to 0.98
Obesity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.99), overweight (adjusted OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98) and former smoking (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.92) predicted a reduced risk of nonadherence in this group after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.
Quality of life & behaviouran association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds 2 cells of the map
OR 1.551.12 to 2.15
In this group, high alcohol consumption (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12-2.15), extreme drinking occasions (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97) and a cluster of 3-4 lifestyle risks (adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) predicted increased odds of nonadherence after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.
Quality of life & behaviouran association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds 2 cells of the map
OR 1.481.11 to 1.97
In this group, high alcohol consumption (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12-2.15), extreme drinking occasions (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97) and a cluster of 3-4 lifestyle risks (adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) predicted increased odds of nonadherence after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.
Quality of life & behaviouran association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds 2 cells of the map
OR 1.611.15 to 2.27
In this group, high alcohol consumption (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12-2.15), extreme drinking occasions (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97) and a cluster of 3-4 lifestyle risks (adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) predicted increased odds of nonadherence after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

Diet, exercise & lifestyle×quality of life & behaviour

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

No other readable study in this cell yet. This paper is the evidence.

Belief with this paperNo claim has been compiled for this cell yet.

Statins×body weight & composition

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

2 readable studies in this cell: 1 favour the treatment, 1 find no difference, 0 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.25no deciding trial · 0 families support, 0 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

Statins×quality of life & behaviour

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

3 readable studies in this cell: 0 favour the treatment, 3 find no difference, 0 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.25no deciding trial · 0 families support, 0 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Heli HalavaDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK heli.halava@utu.fi.
Maarit Jaana KorhonenDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.
Risto HuupponenDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.
Soko SetoguchiDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.
Jaana PenttiDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.
Mika KivimäkiDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.
Jussi VahteraDepartments of Public Health (Halava, Vahtera) and Pharmacology, Drug Development and Therapeutics (Korhonen, Huupponen), University of Turku, and Turku University Hospital (Huupponen Vahtera), Turku, Finland; Duke Clinical Research Institute (Setoguchi), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (Pentti, Vahtera), Turku, Finland; the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health (Kivimäki), University College London, London, UK.

Funding

AHRQ HHS K02 HS017731AHRQ HHS K02-HS017731Medical Research Council MR/K013351/1
8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

backgroundEasily detectable predictors of nonadherence to long-term drug treatment are lacking. We investigated the association between lifestyle factors and nonadherence to statin therapy among patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities.

methodsWe included 9285 participants from the Finnish Public Sector Study who began statin therapy after completing the survey. We linked their survey data with data in national health registers. We used prescription dispensing data to determine participants' nonadherence to statin therapy during the first year of treatment (defined as < 80% of days covered by filled prescriptions). We used logistic regression to estimate the association of several lifestyle factors with nonadherence, after adjusting for sex, age and year of statin initiation.

resultsOf the participants without cardiovascular comorbidities (n = 6458), 3171 (49.1%) were nonadherent with their statin therapy. Obesity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.99), overweight (adjusted OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98) and former smoking (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.92) predicted a reduced risk of nonadherence in this group after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation. Of the participants with cardiovascular comorbidities (n = 2827), 1155 (40.9%) were nonadherent. In this group, high alcohol consumption (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12-2.15), extreme drinking occasions (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97) and a cluster of 3-4 lifestyle risks (adjusted OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) predicted increased odds of nonadherence after adjustment for sex, age and year of statin initiation.

interpretationPeople with cardiovascular comorbidities who had risky drinking behaviours or a cluster of lifestyle risks were at increased risk of nonadherence. Among individuals without cardiovascular comorbidities, information on lifestyle factors was unhelpful in identifying those at increased risk of nonadherence; that overweight, obesity and former smoking were predictors of better adherence in this group provides insight into mechanisms of adherence to preventive medication that deserve further study.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringLife StyleAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesComorbidityDyslipidemiasFemaleFinlandFollow-Up StudiesHealth SurveysHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID24958839
PMCPMC4150731

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.