ArticlePloS one2022
An integrated continuity of care measure improves performance in models predicting medication adherence using population-based administrative data.
Article 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Emerging Domains for Measuring Health Care Delivery With Electronic Health Record Metadata.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Healthcare professional perspectives on medication challenges in the post-stroke patient.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Physician influence on medication adherence, evidence from a population-based cohort.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesContinuity of care (COC) is considered an important determinant of medication adherence based on measures such as the usual provider continuity index (UPCI) that are derived exclusively from physician visit claims. This study aimed to: a) determine if high UPCI values predict physicians who deliver different clinical services; and b) compare UPCI with an integrated COC measure capturing physician visits, prescribing, and a complete medical examination in a multivariable model of patients receiving statin medications.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of new statin users between 2012 and 2017 in Saskatchewan, Canada. We calculated sensitivity/specificity of a high UPCI value for predicting physicians who were prescribers of statins and/or providers of complete medical examinations. Next, we used logistic regression models to test two measures of COC (high UPCI value or an integrated COC measure) on the outcome of optimal statin adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80%). The DeLong test was used to compare predictive performance of the two models.
resultsAmong 55,144 new statin users, a high UPCI was neither a sensitive or specific marker of physicians who prescribed statins or performed a complete medical examination. The integrated COC measure had a stronger association with optimal adherence [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50 to 1.63] than UPCI (adjusted OR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.28), and improved predictive performance of the adherence model.
conclusionThe number of physician visits alone appears to be insufficient to represent COC. An integrated measure improves predictive performance for optimal medication adherence in patients initiating statins.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.