Participants best performing week
One participant did not provide adherence results for their first week. Therefore, their results are not included.
| Participant | TMR01 | TMR02 | TMR03 | TMR04 | TMR05 | TMR06 | TMR07 | TMR09 |
| Experimental | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Control | x | |||||||
| Equal | x |
Overall, 5 of the 7 remaining participants (71%) performed better when under the experimental condition, receiving an SMS message reminder. One participant performed better under control condition (14%) and 1 performed equally well under experimental and control conditions (14%)
Participants results per condition
TMR01
TMR02
TMR03
TMR04
TMR05
TMR06
TMR07
TMR09
Summary of all participants adherence across both conditions
| Participant | TMR01 | TMR02 | TMR03 | TMR04 | TMR05 | TMR06 | TMR07 | TMR09 |
| Experimental | 100% | n/a | 86% | 100% | 93% | 100% | 86% | 86% |
| Control | 86% | 21% | 86% | 93% | 100% | 64% | 26% | 71% |
Stage in the experiment each participant performed best
As the study used a within-subject design, it is also useful to look at which stage of the study each participant was most adherent.
“W1” is used to represent the first stage of the study, and “W2” is used to represent the second stage.
| Participant | TMR01 | TMR02 | TMR03 | TMR04 | TMR05 | TMR06 | TMR07 | TMR09 |
| Experimental | W2 | W1 | W1 | W2 | W2 | |||
| Control | W1 | |||||||
| Equal | x |
Looking at the performance results alone, it is impossible to gauge if the within-subject design influenced behaviour across each stage of the study. I.e. did the participant perform better in the second stage because they had ‘learned’ to take their pill, and had gotten into the rhythm of medication taking from their experience in the first week. This information can only be obtained through the post-study interview. However, the answer is also subject to bias.
Did the SMS reminder have an impact?
Yes. Across both stages of the study, only the experimental group had an adherence of 80% or higher.
Did the intervention help them be adherent when they might have otherwise not been?
It’s hard to say. In general, the majority of the participants were adherent across both conditions. Three participants were adherent in the experimental week, but not in the control week.
| Participant | TMR01 | TMR02 | TMR03 | TMR04 | TMR05 | TMR06 | TMR07 | TMR09 |
| Experimental | 100% | n/a | 86% | 100% | 93% | 100% | 86% | 86% |
| Control | 86% | 21% | 86% | 93% | 100% | 64% | 27% | 71% |
In the end of study interviews, all participants stated that they had the same barriers for taking their medication; being busy, independent of which stage in the study they were.
The reminder helped them to take their medication when they were busy.
If you forget, the message reminder is there the next time you check your phone
Would the participants recommend the SMS reminder to a friend?
Yes. The average score was 9 out of 10, with one 1 being not at all likely, and 10 being extremely likely.
Did the SMS reminder help them remember their pills?
Yes. The average score was 6.6 out of 7.
Did the SMS reminder help them complete their prescription?
Yes. The average score was 6.2 out of 7.
Compared to previous prescriptions, did they feel they performed better or worse at taking their medicine with the SMS reminder?
Yes. With an average score of 9.6 out of 11. Where 1 was much worse, 6 was about the same, and 11 was much better.
Interesting insights
When asked about the reasons affected the likelihood of medication adherence, a participant commented:
Expectations regarding the outcome of treatment and the consequences of poor adherence
Control
One of the participants that had experienced the experimental condition in the first stage of the study mentioned that they found the reminder annoying. After the second stage of the study, when asked about their adherence and method for remembering to take their medication stated that they had set up their own reminder on their phone.
