You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Number of experts1 agreeing with each meta-review proposition and the priority scores assigned by 18 of the 20 participating experts listed from high to low

From: Furthering patient adherence: A position paper of the international expert forum on patient adherence based on an internet forum discussion

  Meta-review propositions Agree N Partly agree N Disagree N Priority score2 Mean (sd)
1 Focus on simple interventions workable and feasible in (busy) clinical practice 12 5 0 2.7 (1.2)
2 Progress in adherence theories is to be expected from conjoint efforts of medical, pharmaceutical, social and technical scientists 11 5 1 3.29 (1.8)
3 Patient groups should (help to) develop adherence interventions 16 0 0 3.35 (1.5)
4 Adherence interventions should be limited solely to non-adherent patients 2 6 10 3.35 (1.9)
5 Current adherence theories are more successful in explaining than in improving adherence: theory development should focus on improving adherence 5 4 8 3.65 (1.8)
6 To improve adherence, changing the situation is more promising than changing the patient 4 12 2 4.5 (1.5)
  1. 1 Not every expert reacted to every proposition
  2. 2 Range 1 – 6; 1 indicating highest priority, 6 lowest priority