Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35113930›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

The rates and measurement of adherence to acamprosate in randomised controlled clinical trials: A systematic review.

Kim Donoghue, Laura Hermann, Eileen Brobbin, Colin Drummond

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Kim DonoghueDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7316-1716
Laura HermannNational Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Eileen BrobbinNational Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8464-4847
Colin DrummondNational Addictions Centre, Addictions Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
King's College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701681Medical Research Council G0701818
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe current research aims to systematically review the rates of adherence reported in randomised controlled clinical trials of acamprosate. It also sought to determine the reliability of the adherence monitoring and measurement methods used in these trials.

methodsThe protocol for this review was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42021230011). A search of the literature was conducted using OVID MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO from database inception to January 2021. Randomised controlled trials with a minimum sample size of 10 per treatment arm that compared the efficacy of acamprosate with placebo or other active medication in adults with a diagnosis of alcohol dependence were included. Data on rates of adherence, methods of measurement and monitoring of adherence was extracted from eligible studies independently in duplicate by two reviewers. A weighted mean adherence rate was calculated. The reliability of adherence monitoring methods was determined by calculating an adherence-assurance score based on the adherence monitoring method used. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

resultsFifteen studies met the eligibility criteria involving 4,450 participants (2,480 participants in the placebo arms). A mean adherence rate of 88% (54.2-95.0%) was reported across studies that reported the percentage of medication taken. A mean adherence rate of 84.9% (56.4-91.3%) was reported for trials that reported the percentage of participants taking more than 80% of medication prescribed. There is low confidence in the methods used to monitor adherence with all clinical trials having a low adherence-assurance rating. Risk of bias was judged to be high for all included studies.

conclusionsAdherence to acamprosate in clinical trials can be poor with low confidence in the methods used to measure it. Adherence rates therefore might not be accurate, which has implications for determining the efficacy of acamprosate.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceAcamprosateAdultAlcohol DeterrentsAlcoholismClinical Decision-MakingHumansMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsAcamprosateAlcohol Deterrents

Identifiers

PMID35113930
PMCPMC8812903
OpenAlexW4210298004

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.