Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32005778›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2020

Do mobile device apps designed to support medication adherence demonstrate efficacy? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials, with meta-analysis.

Laura Catherine Armitage, Aikaterini Kassavou, Stephen Sutton

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
15.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · 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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the FOCUS ADHD App in monitoring adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2023
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura Catherine ArmitageNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK laura.armitage@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5009-4899
Aikaterini KassavouDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6562-4143
Stephen SuttonDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0615-20013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo estimate the efficacy of app-based interventions designed to support medication adherence and investigate which behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used by the apps are associated with efficacy.

designSystematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with meta-analysis.

settingMedline/PubMed, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase and Web of Science were searched from 1990 to November 2018 for RCTs conducted in any healthcare setting.

participantsStudies of participants of any age taking prescribed medication for any health condition and for any duration.

interventionAn app-based intervention delivered through a smartphone, tablet computer or personal digital assistant to help, support or advise about medication adherence. COMPARATOR: One of (1) usual care, (2) a control app which did not use any BCTs to improve medication adherence or (3) a non-app-based comparator. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the pooled effect size of changes in medication adherence. The secondary outcome was the association between BCTs used by the apps and the effect size.

resultsThe initial search identified 13 259 citations. After title and abstract screening, full-text articles of 83 studies were screened for eligibility. Nine RCTs with 1159 recruited participants were included. The mean age of participants was >50 years in all but one study. Health conditions of target populations included cardiovascular disease, depression, Parkinson's disease, psoriasis and multimorbidity. The meta-analysis indicated that patients who use mobile apps to support them in taking medications are more likely to self-report adherence to medications (OR 2.120, 95% CI 1.635 to 2.747, n=988) than those in the comparator groups. Meta-regression of the BCTs did not reveal any significant associations with effect size.

conclusionsApp-based medication adherence interventions may have a positive effect on patient adherence. Larger scale studies are required to further evaluate this effect, including long-term sustainability, and intervention and participant characteristics that are associated with efficacy and app usage. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO Protocol Registration Number: CRD42017080150.

Indexed as

Computers, HandheldMedication AdherenceRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf ReportCardiovascular DiseasesHumansSmartphoneText MessagingGENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine)primary carePUBLIC HEALTHtelemedicineWorld Wide Web technology

Identifiers

PMID32005778
PMCPMC7045248
OpenAlexW3003343618

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.