Trial reportBMJ open2026
Remote person-centred care and long-term medication management in primary care: post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03183817 (Person-centred Care at Distance for Persons With Chronic Heart Failure), which is not on this 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.
Person-centred Care at Distance for Persons With Chronic Heart Failure (CHF) and/or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore refill adherence to prescribed treatment for chronic heart failure (CHF) and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), during and after a remote person-centred care (PCC) intervention.
designPost hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial cohort.
settingWe used data from the PROTECT (Person-Centred Care at Distance) randomised controlled trial in Swedish primary care, which were linked to data from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register.
participantsA total of 222 participants from nine primary care centres were enrolled in PROTECT. This study included participants with dispensed medications for CHF and/or COPD, excluding those with multidose dispensing (intervention n=50; control n=49, 42% women, mean age 69 years).
interventionsPROTECT evaluated a PCC intervention using a digital platform and structured telephone support in addition to usual care versus usual care alone. OUTCOME MEASURES: Refill adherence was compared between groups, defining appropriate medication supply as ≥80% of days covered over 2 years. We also examined associations between refill adherence and number of long-term conditions and medications.
resultsRefill adherence did not differ significantly between groups. A higher number of long-term conditions was associated with lower odds of refill adherence (adjusted OR (aOR) per additional condition: 0.71; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.97; p=0.041), as were more long-term medications (aOR per additional medication class: 0.84; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; p=0.029).
conclusionsThe PROTECT intervention did not improve refill adherence, suggesting that future person-centred interventions may require more structured medication-management focus. Increasing numbers of long-term conditions and medications were both associated with lower refill adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03183817.
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.