ArticlePloS one2026
Factors associated with patient adherence to medical recommendations during a health crisis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient non-adherence to medical recommendations is associated with significant economic and health consequences, particularly in chronic diseases. While less studied, similar implications are also observed for short-term antibiotic treatment non-adherence. A global pandemic creates a complex medical reality with the potential to impact patient adherence, and it is of interest to investigate its effect on patient adherence regarding common community-acquired infectious diseases. This study focused on primary care clinic visits with a diagnosis of fever or cough and followed the performance of referred laboratory tests and chest X-rays and the purchase of prescribed antibiotics, as adherence outcomes.
methodsA comprehensive and unique dataset of clinic visits in Southern Israel was used to assess the impact of the pandemic on patient adherence outcomes. We compared the outcomes between the pandemic period and the preceding and succeeding periods and used multivariate modeling to study the impact of the pandemic period on adherence, subject to patient and visit characteristics.
resultsIn total, 609,823 visits were analyzed. Before the pandemic, adherence to throat cultures surpassed that of chest X-ray and referred laboratory tests, and cephalosporins exhibiting higher adherence rates than other antibiotics. Social restrictions and lockdown periods were found to be associated with a decrease in patient adherence. Adherence to referred tests decreased among all patients during social restrictions for complete blood count (Odds Ratio (OR)=0.79, 95%CI = 0.64,0.96), and throat culture (OR=0.64, 95%CI = 0.43,0.93) and among older patients for chest X-ray. Adherence to prescribed antibiotics dropped during social restrictions for penicillin (OR=0.26, 95%CI = 0.17,0.40) and cephalosporins (OR=0.52, 95%CI = 0.32,0.86), but increased for macrolides (OR=2.16, 95%CI = 1.20,3.88). Rural clinics were associated with lower adherence in all outcomes, and visits by phone call were associated with lower adherence, most prominently in throat culture (OR=0.32, 95%CI = 0.26,0.38).
conclusionThis study offers a unique contribution to our understanding of patient adherence to acute infection management strategies during a pandemic. The findings illuminate the significant impact of uncertainty on patient adherence to diagnostic testing and antibiotic regimens. Understanding these multifaceted influences is essential for improving patient outcomes and optimizing antibiotics use and resource availability during public health crises.
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.