The Concordance of Self-Report With Other Measures of Medication Adherence

A Summary of the Literature

Bibliographic Data

ID9105086
AuthorsMathew C Garber (corresponding author), David P Nau (0009-0008-4405-746X, University of Michigan, corresponding author), Steven R Erickson (0000-0002-1855-3645), James E Aikens (0000-0002-3795-9018, Day Family Medicine), Joseph B Lawrence
Year2004
Volume42
Issue7
Pages649-652
Publication date2004-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedical Care (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948
PublisherOvid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1097/01.mlr.0000129496.05898.02
PMID15213489
OpenAlexW2063780338
LanguageEN
Citations received32
References cited8

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the concordance of self-report measures of medication adherence (interview, diary, or questionnaire) with nonself-report measures of adherence (administrative claims, pill count or canister weight, plasma drug concentration, electronic monitors, or clinical opinion). METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify published reports in which self-report and nonself-report measures of adherence were used within the same study. The concordance of measures within each study was categorized as high, moderate, or low based on a comparison of the adherence estimates. RESULTS: Eight-six comparisons of self-report to nonself-report measures of adherence were identified. Thirty-seven of the 86 comparisons (43%) were categorized as highly concordant. However, concordance varied substantially by type of self-report measure and nonself-report measure. Self-report measures, in general, were highly concordant with electronic measures in only 17% of comparisons, whereas they were highly concordant with other types of nonself-report measures in 58% of comparisons (chi-square = 14.30, P <0.01). When comparing self-report measures, interviews had significantly lower concordance with nonself-report measures as compared with questionnaires or diaries (chi-square = 8.47, P = 0.01). In 15 comparisons of interviews with electronic measures, none of the comparisons were highly concordant, whereas questionnaires and diaries had moderate-to-high concordance with electronic measures in 12 of 16 comparisons (75%). CONCLUSIONS: The concordance of self-report and other measures of medication adherence varies widely based on the type of measures used. Questionnaires and diaries tend to have moderate-to-high concordance with other measures of medication adherence. However, interview-based self-reports are not concordant with electronic measures. Questionnaire and diary methods could be preferable to interviews for self-reported medication adherence

Concordance · Family medicine · Pill · Self-report study · Clinical Psychology · Internal Medicine · Medication Adherence and Compliance · Medicine · Mobile Health and mHealth Applications · Nursing · Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions · Psychology