SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Adherence”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

22 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Data-centric, robust, and explainable multimodal deep learning for clinical decision support: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Multimodal deep learning is increasingly proposed for clinical decision support (CDS) under a "data-centric" framing that prioritizes label quality, missing-modality robustness, distribution shift, calibration, and explainability. Prior reviews have examined multimodal medical AI, CDS, and data-centric methods separately, but none address their intersection. We mapped the modalities, fusion strategies, and data-centric and explainability techniques used in this recent literature, quantified how often each is implemented rather than merely mentioned, assessed deployment-relevant evidence (external validation, clinical-outcome measurement, equity), and formally appraised study-level risk of bias. METHODS: Following the PRISMA 2020 statement (PROSPERO CRD420261427815; registered retrospectively), we screened 150 records and included primary, clinical, multimodal studies that applied machine or deep learning to a decision-support task and reported at least one quantitative result. Two reviewers screened and extracted data with consensus adjudication. Each study was coded against pre-specified operational definitions, separating implemented or empirically evaluated techniques from those only mentioned. Study-level risk of bias was assessed with PROBAST + AI. Synthesis was narrative. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies met inclusion; 30 (97%) were published between 2024 and 2026, with a median of three modalities (range 2-6), most commonly structured EHR (71%) and imaging (39%). Data-centric techniques were frequently reported (74-84% across label-noise, distribution-shift, calibration, missing-modality and class-imbalance handling; equity 61%). However, external validation was reported in only 4/31 studies (13%), a clinical or provider outcome in 3/31 (10%), and no study reported routine deployment. Overall risk of bias was high in 27/31 studies (87%), driven by the analysis domain. CONCLUSION: Within this recent, self-selected slice of the field, technical robustness and explainability techniques are widely reported but rarely validated out-of-distribution or against clinical outcomes, and the underlying evidence is at high risk of bias. Progress requires external multi-site validation, clinical-outcome measurement, formal bias appraisal, and adherence to AI reporting standards (e.g., TRIPOD + AI) before deployment can be justified.

Deep Learning↗

PubMed2026

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of self-directed online writing interventions for posttraumatic stress symptoms in a real-world digital setting.

Background: Public health and other large-scale crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have intensified the global mental health burden, creating unprecedented demand for accessible interventions for posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS).Objective: We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of two self-directed online writing interventions embedded within China's WeChat ecosystem during the COVID-19 pandemic through a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.Methods: Between December 2021 and August 2022, 1,526 adults were screened for PTSS via a Tencent Medinfo Mini-Program. Eligible participants (n = 211) were randomised to Guided Narrative Technique-Writing (GNT-W, n = 100) or Expressive Writing (EW, n = 111). Both interventions comprised three self-directed daily writing sessions delivered entirely online without human support. Primary outcome was PTSD symptom severity (PTSD Checklist-Short), assessed at baseline, post-intervention, 2-week, and 1-month follow-ups.Results: While initial engagement followed typical digital health patterns (64.5% overall attrition), participants who initiated treatment showed strong adherence (77% completion). Both interventions were associated with significant within-group reductions in PTSS severity (GNT-W: b = -0.43, p = .023, d = -0.43; EW: b = -0.60, p = .001, d = -0.58), with no significant between-group difference (group × time: b = 0.18, p = .48). GNT-W did not confer additional benefit over EW protocol on PTSS severity.Conclusions: Both self-directed writing interventions were associated with within-group reductions in PTSS; without an inactive control condition, however, these changes cannot be firmly attributed to the interventions. GNT-W showed no advantage over the simpler EW protocol. These findings offer preliminary support for embedding scalable, low-barrier writing interventions in widely used digital platforms.Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000034836.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Older adults with resectable gastric cancer undergoing perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy plus perioperative chemotherapy: A secondary analysis of the AGITG TOPGEAR phase III trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate treatment adherence, adverse events, and survival in older (≥70 years) adults undergoing perioperative treatment for gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients with resectable gastric/gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma (ECOG 0-1) enrolled in the phase III TOPGEAR trial were randomized to perioperative chemotherapy (ECF/ECX or FLOT) alone or perioperative chemotherapy plus preoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine). In this exploratory analysis, treatment completion, grade ≥ 3 adverse events (CTCAE v3.0), surgical outcomes, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between older and younger adults. RESULTS: Of the 574 patients enrolled, 135 (24%) were ≥ 70 years. Older adults more frequently required preoperative chemotherapy dose reductions, omissions, or delays (chemoradiotherapy: 55% vs 35%, p = 0.004; chemotherapy: 60% vs 48%, p = 0.087). Rates of grade ≥ 3 adverse events were comparable between older and younger patients (chemoradiotherapy: 66% vs 67%, p = 0.874; chemotherapy: 68% vs 59%, p = 0.220), but older adults more often had hematologic toxicity and grade ≥ 3 diarrhea in the chemotherapy group (56% vs 37%, p = 0.006; 21% vs 6%, p < 0.001). Resection rates, grade 3/4 surgical complications, number of removed lymph nodes, and 30-/90-day mortality were similar by age. OS and PFS were comparable across age groups, with numerically favorable outcomes for older adults (OS: HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58-1.26 [chemoradiotherapy]; HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.51-1.11 [chemotherapy]; PFS: HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.53-1.15 [chemoradiotherapy]; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.47-1.03 [chemotherapy]). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with gastric cancer achieved comparable oncologic outcomes to younger patients, despite more frequent treatment modifications and higher hematologic toxicity.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Critical insights on the application of the theory of planned behaviour to food handlers' food safety practices.

Foodborne diseases remain a significant public health concern, often linked to unsafe food-handling practices. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) is widely used to predict and explain food safety behaviours, yet its application in this field has not been systematically and in-depth evaluated. This review evaluated how the TPB has been applied to study food handlers' behaviour, focusing on methodological approaches, use of the TACT (Target, Action, Context, and Time) framework, validity, elicitation studies, and reliability. Seventeen studies were included following a systematic search of four databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library, and Taylor & Francis Online). Data were extracted on behaviour definition, aim of study, main findings, use of indirect and direct TPB measures, use of elicitation studies, internal consistency, content validation, analytical methods used, and any extensions to the original TPB framework. Key elements related to adherence to core TPB principles and measurement practices were extracted using a Checklist. Most studies used direct measures of TPB constructs, and only a few reported procedures for content validation. Considerable variability was found in the reporting of key measurement and psychometric practices. Five studies fully applied the TACT framework, while nine incorporated additional factors such as knowledge and moral norms. Elicitation studies were conducted in five cases where indirect measures were employed. Analytical approaches were mainly based on multiple linear regression, with limited use of more advanced techniques such as structural equation modeling. Twelve studies reported internal consistency results. Overall, the review highlights opportunities to strengthen methodological practices in future TPB research on food safety. Greater attention to conducting and reporting content validation, full application of the TACT framework, reporting of internal consistency, and consistent inclusion of elicitation studies when using indirect measures may enhance transparency, reinforcing the credibility and trustworthiness of research findings. A major methodological limitation of this review was that screening and data extraction were conducted by a single reviewer and no formal quality or risk-of-bias assessment of the included studies was performed. Despite these limitations, the findings provide practical guidance for the development and validation of TPB-based questionnaires and may support more robust food safety research, interventions, and policy initiatives aimed at improving food handlers' practices.

Humans↗