SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Urquhart J. A call for a new discipline. Pharm Tech December 1987: 617. (Editorial).
  • 2
    Harter JG, Peck CC. Chronobiology: suggestions for integrating it into drug development. Ann NY Acad Sci 1991; 618: 563571.
  • 3
    Urquhart J. Pharmacodynamics of variable patient compliance: implications for pharmaceutical value. Adv Drug Delivery Revs 1998; 33: 207219.
  • 4
    Urquhart J, Chevalley C. Impact of unrecognized dosing errors on the cost and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals. Drug Inform J 1988; 22: 363378.
  • 5
    Cramer JA, Mattson RH, Prevey ML, Scheyer RD, Ouellette VL. How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique. JAMA 1989; 261: 32733277.
  • 6
    Kruse W, Weber E. Dynamics of drug regimen compliance – its assessment by microprocessor-based monitoring. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 38: 561565.
  • 7
    Averbuch M, Weintraub M, Pollack DJ. Compliance assessment in clinical trials: the MEMS device. J Clin Res Pharmacoepidemiol 1990; 4: 199204.
  • 8
    See the bibliography of over 530 publications at www.aardex.ch
  • 9
    Anonymous. The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Institutes Health, National Heart, Lung, Blood Institute, Bethesda, MD, 1997. NIH Publication 98–4080. Arch Int Med 1997; 157: 24132456.
  • 10
    Turner BJ, Hecht FM. Improving on a coin toss to predict patient adherence to medications. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 10041006.
  • 11
    Wood HF, Feinstein AR, Taranta A, Epstein JA, Simpson R. Rheumatic fever in children and adolescents: a long-term epidemiologic study of subsequent prophylaxis, streptococcal infections, and clinical sequelae. III. Comparative effectiveness of three prophylaxis regimens in preventing streptococcal infections and rheumatic recurrences. Ann Int Med 1964; 60(Suppl. 5): 3146.
  • 12
    Joyce CRB. Patient co-operation and the sensitivity of clinical trials. J Chronic Dis 1962; 15: 10251036.
  • 13
    The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial results. (I) Reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease; (II) The relationship of reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease to cholesterol lowering. JAMA 1984; 251: 351374.
  • 14
    Manninen V, Elo MO, Frick H, et al. Lipid alterations and decline in the incidence of coronary heart disease in the Helsinki Heart Study. JAMA 1988; 260: 641651.
  • 15
    Urquhart J. Patient compliance as an explanatory variable in four selected cardiovascular trials. In Patient Compliance in Medical Practice and Clinical Trials, eds. CramerJA, SpilkerB. New York: Raven Press, 1991: 301322.
  • 16
    Feely M, Cooke J, Price D, et al. Low-dose phenobarbitone as an indicator of compliance with drug therapy. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1987; 24: 7783.
  • 17
    Pullar T, Kumar S, Chrystyn H, Rice P, Peaker S, Feely M. The prediction of steady-state plasma phenobarbitone concentrations (following low-dose phenobarbitone) to refine its use as an indicator of compliance. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1991; 32: 329333.
  • 18
    Mäenpää H, Manninen V, Heinonen OP. Comparison of the digoxin marker with capsule counting and compliance questionnaire methods for measuring compliance to medication in a clinical trial. Eur Heart J 1987; 8(Suppl. I): 3943.
  • 19
    Rangno RE, Langlois S. Comparison of withdrawal phenomena after propranolol, metoprolol, and pindolol. Am Heart J 1982; 104: 473478.
  • 20
    Houston MC, Hodge R. Beta-adrenergic blocker withdrawal syndromes in hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases. Am Heart J 1988; 116: 515523.
  • 21
    Psaty BM, Koepsell TD, Wagner EH, LoGerfo JP, Inui TS. The relative risk of incident coronary heart disease associated with recently stopping the use of beta blockers. JAMA 1990; 263: 16531657.
  • 22
    Anonymous. Long-term use of beta blockers: the need for sustained compliance. WHO Drug Information 1990; 4: 5253.
  • 23
    The Drug Holiday Pattern of Noncompliance in Clinical Trials. Challenge to Conventional Concepts of Drug Safety and Efficacy, eds. MeyerUA, PeckCC. Washington, DC. Center for Drug Development Science. Georgetown University, 1997.
  • 24
    Urquhart J. The electronic medication event monitor – lessons for pharmacotherapy. Clin Pharmacokinet 1997; 32: 345356.
  • 25
    Anonymous. Achievements in Public Health, 1900–99, Family Planning. MMWR 1999; 48: 10731080.
  • 26
    De Geest S, Abraham I, Moons P, et al. Late acute rejection and subclinical noncompliance with cyclosporine therapy in heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant 1998; 17: 854863.
  • 27
    Petri H, Urquhart J. Patient compliance with beta-blocker medication in general practice. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety 1994; 3: 251256.
  • 28
    Cramer JA. Microelectronic systems for monitoring and enhancing patient compliance with medication regimens. Drugs 1995; 49: 321327.
  • 29
    Kastrissios H, Blaschke TF. Medication compliance as a feature in drug development. Ann Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1997; 37: 451475.
  • 30
    Vander Stichele RH, Thomson M, Verkoelen K, Droussin AM. Measuring patient compliance with electronic monitoring: lisinopril versus atenolol in essential hypertension. Post-Marketing Surveillance 1992; 6: 7790.
  • 31
    Guerrero D, Rudd P, Bryant-Kosling C, Middleton BF. Antihypertensive medication-taking. Investigation of a simple regimen. Am J Hypertension 1993; 6: 586592.
  • 32
    Mengden T, Binswanger B, Spühler T, Weisser B, Vetter W. The use of self-measured blood pressure determinations in assessing dynamics of drug compliance in a study with amlodipine once a day, morning versus evening. J Hypertension 1993; 11: 14031411.
  • 33
    Detry J-MR, Block P, De Backer G, Degaute J-P, Six R. Patient compliance and therapeutic coverage: comparison of amlodipine versus nifedipine (slow-release) in the treatment of hypertension. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1995; 47: 477481.
  • 34
    Mallion JM, Dutrey-Dupagne C, Vaur L, et al. Comportement des patients ayant une hypertension arterielle legère a moderée vis-à-vis de leur traitement. Apport du pilulier électronique. Ann Cardiol Angeiol 1995; 44: 597605.
  • 35
    Mallion J-M, Dutry-Dupagne C, Vaur L, et al. Benefits of electronic pillboxes in evaluating treatment compliance of patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Hypertension 1996; 14: 137144.
  • 36
    Lee JY, Kusek JW, Greene PG, et al. for the AASK Pilot Study Investigators. Assessing medication adherence by pill count and electronic monitoring in the African American study of kidney disease and hypertension (AASK) pilot study. Am J Hypertens 1996; 9: 719725.
  • 37
    Burnier M, Schneider MP, Waeber B. L'observance thérapeutique dans le traitement de l'hypertension artérielle: un facteur important àévaluer. Méd Hyg 1997; 2175: 15911594.
  • 38
    Waeber B, Brunner HR, Metry J-M. Compliance with antihypertensive treatment: implications for practice. Blood Pressure 1997; 6: 326331.
  • 39
    Fagundes VG, Francischetti EA, Malachias MVB, Sbissa AS, Do-Nascimento-Netto RM. Randomized and multicentric Brazilian study of amlodipine versus nifedipine retard in patients with mild to moderate hypertension with compliance and drug holidays follow-up. Revista Brasileira Med 1998; 55: 625636.
  • 40
    Vaur L, Vaisse B, Genes N, Elkik F, Legrand C, Poggi L. Use of electronic pill boxes to assess risk of poor treatment compliance. Results of a large-scale trial. Am J Hypertension 1999; 12: 374378.
  • 41
    Girvin B, McDermott BJ, Johnston GD. A comparison of enalapril 20 mg once-daily versus 10 mg twice-daily in terms of blood pressure lowering and patient compliance. J Hypertension 1999; 17: 16271631.
  • 42
    Johnson BF, Hamilton G, Fink J, Lucey G, Bennet N, Lew R. A design for testing intervention to improve adherence within a hypertension clinical trial. Controlled Clin Trials 2000; 21: 6272.
  • 43
    Andrejak M, Genes N, Vaur L, Poncelet P, Clerson P, Carré A. Electronic pill-boxes in the evaluation of antihypertensive treatment compliance: comparison of once daily versus twice daily regimen. Am J Hypertens 2000; 13: 184190.
  • 44
    Bertholet N, Favrat B, Fallab-Stubi CL, Brunner HR, Burnier M. Why objective monitoring of compliance is important for the management of hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 2000; 2: 258262.
  • 45
    Burnier M, Schneider MP, Chiolero A, Fallab Stubi CL, Brunner HR. Electronic compliance monitoring in resistant hypertension: the basis for rational therapeutic decisions. J Hypertension 2001; 19: 335341.
  • 46
    Efron B, Feldman D. Compliance as an explanatory variable in clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc 1991; 86: 717.
  • 47
    Zeger SL, Liang K-Y. Comment: dose–response estimands. J Am Stat Assoc 1991; 86: 1819.
  • 48
    Meier P. Discussion. J . Am Stat Assoc 1991; 86: 1922.
  • 49
    Rubin D. Comment: dose–response estimands. J Am Stat Assoc 1991; 86: 2224.
  • 50
    Efron B. Foreword to the Limburg Compliance Symposium. Stat Med 1998; 17: 249250.
  • 51
    Cox D. Discussion of the Limburg Compliance Symposium. Stat Med 1998; 17: 387389.
  • 52
    Urquhart J. Demonstrating effectiveness in a post-placebo era. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 70: 115120.
  • 53
    Urquhart J, Struijker-Boudier HAJ. Positive inotrope trials in congestive heart failure: what has gone wrong? Eur Cardiologist J Fax: 1998; 3: : 12 February.
  • 54
    Cramer JA, Rosenheck R. Enhancing medication compliance for people with serious mental disease. J Nervous Mental Dis 1999; 187: 5354.
  • 55
    McCann MF, Potter LS. Progestin-only oral contraception: a comprehensive review. Contraception 1994; 50(Suppl. 1): S9S195.
  • 56
    Didlake RH, Dreyfus K, Kerman RH, Van Buren CT, Kahan BD. Patient noncompliance. a major cause of late graft failure in cyclosporine-treated renal transplants. Transplantation Proc 1988; 20(Suppl. 3): 6369.
  • 57
    Rovelli M, Palmeri D, Vossler E, Bartus S, Hull D, Schweizer R. Noncompliance in organ transplant recipients. Transplantation Proc 1989; 21: 833834.