. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jul 7.

Published in final edited form as: AIDS Behav. 2006 May;10(3):227–245. doi: 10.1007/s10461-006-9078-6

Table 1.

Studies reporting the association of self-reported antiretroviral adherence with adherence as measured by other indirect measures or with clinical indicators

Source	Study	Self-report measure	Recall period	Association with other indirect adherence measures	Association with clinical indicators
	Setting; location; sample size	Source/items/(nonadherence operationalization) (CO: continuous, CT: categorical, DI: dichotomous)		electronic data monitoring; pharmacy refills (PR); pill count (PC); other	HIV-1 RNA viral load (VL); CD4; other (adherent vs. nonadherent)
Alcoba et al. (2003)	2 HIV clinics; Spain; N=106	N/R; N/R; DI: <90% of prescribed doses for at least one drug	4 days		VL detectable (NS); plasma indinavir levels (NS)
Aloisi et al. (2002)	57 ID hospital units; Italy; N = 366	N/R; 3 items; DI: “Yes” to all three items vs. <3	6 months		VL undetectable*** 68% vs. 40% @ 12 mo
Altice, Mostashari, and Friedland (2001)	4 prison HIV clinics; CT, US;N=164	Ickovics ‘97; N/R; DI: 80% of pills taken/prescribed	7 days	PR r = 0.82 (significance N/R)	CD4 count (NS)
Ammassari et al. (2004)	11 clinical centers; Italy; N=135	Murri ‘00; 1 forced-choice item on timing of last missed dose; DI: missed ≥ 1 dose over last 7 days	7 days		CD4 higher mean (SD)* 637 (341) vs. 509 (362)
Antinori et al. (2004)	Study cohort; Italy; N = 238	Murri ‘00; N/R; DI: missed ≥ 1 dose over last 7 days	7 days		VL rebound > 500 copies/mL (NS)
Arnsten et al. (2001)	Hospital study cohort; Bronx, NY, US; N = 67	N/R; N/R; CO: % of prescribed doses taken	1 day; 7 days	EDM; 1-day r = 0.49*; 7-day r = 0.46*	VL <500; 1-day r = 0.43*; 7 day r = 0.52*
Bangsberg et al. (2000)	Community cohort; San Francisco, US; N = 34	N/R; 3 items; CO: Mean value of 3 measures of % prescribed doses	3 days		VL r= −0.60***
Bangsberg et al. (2001)	Community cohort; San Francisco, US; N = 45	N/R; Day-by-day review of doses; CO: % prescribed doses, DI: >80%	3 days	PC r = 0.85*; PC κ = 0.65; provider estimate (NS)*
Bangsberg et al. (2002)	Private clinic and county hospital; San Francisco, US;N=110	AACTG (Chesney ‘00); Day-by-day review of doses on computer; DI: 90 and 80%	3 days	Provider estimate*** (test statistic NR)	VL detectable ≥ 500; <80% OR 3.0 (95% CI 1.1–8.1)
Barroso et al. (2003)	HIV reference center; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; N= 64	N/R; 1 item; DI: taking as prescribed >80% days	30 days		VL<400; OR 7.2 (95% CI 1.6–31.9) in semen; OR_A 8.2 (95% CI 1.2–56.7) in plasma
Brigido et al. (2001)	Public AIDS clinic; Sao Paulo, Brazil; N= 168	N/R; 5 items; CT: Reg: all doses taken, qReg: miss up to 4 doses or 1 full day/mo, Ireg: all other irregular	30 days		VL median log₁₀; Reg 2.0 (1.6–5.6); qReg 2.0 (1.6–5.5); Ireg 3.6 (1.6–6.2); CD₄ median gain; (test statistic N/R); AIDS development or death* (test statistic N/R)
Carrieri et al. (2001)	Routine clinical sites; France; N = 436	AACTG; 5 items for each drug; CT: 100%, 80–99%, <80%	4 days		VL undetectable at 4; 12, and 20 months** (test statistic N/R)
Carrieri et al., 2003	Routine clinical sites; France; N = 360	AACTG; 5 items for each drug; CT: 100%, 80–99%, <80%	4 days		VL suppression at 3 years: Highly adherent OR 3.4 (95% CI 1.4–7.9); Mod adherent NS; CD4 increase >200 by 3 years: highly adherent OR 2.4 (95% CI 1.0–5.5); Mod adherent NS
Catz, Kelly, Bogart, Benotsch, and McAuliffe (2000)	Outpatient ID clinic; Milwaukee, US; N = 72	N/R; 2 items; CT: missed doses daily, weekly, monthly, or never	3 months		VL <400* (test statistic N/R)
Cederfjall, Langius-Eklof, Lidman, and Wredling (2002)	Outpatient HIV clinic; Stockholm, Sweden; N = 99	N/R; 1,7, 30 days =% missed in 1 month; DI: 959%	1 month		VL <50 71% vs. 45%; CD4 <200 8% vs. 32%**
Cingolani et al. (2002)	Tertiary care ID department; Italy; N =127	Murri ‘00; 1 item, timing of last missed dose; DI: missed before 2–4 weeks (adherent) vs. yesterday, last week	N/A		VL <500 at 3 mo* (test statistic NR); nonadherent OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.1–0.95); CD4 change; 3 mo + 50 vs. — 12; 6 mo + 62 vs. −13*
Cohn, Kammann, Williams, Currier, and Chesney (2002)	AACTG sites; 29 sites in US; N = 643	AACTG; 2 items; DI: 100%	48 hr		VL>500 nonadherence over 56 weeks; OR 2.3 (95% CI N/R); 70% vs. 50%***
Dorz et al. (2003)	2 ID departments; Padua and Verona, Italy; N= 109	N/R; l item; CO: # pills/# prescribed, DI: 80%	7 days		VL mean 10,854 vs. 34,149; CD4 mean 6899 vs. 379**
Duong et al. (2001)	AIDS outpatient clinic; Dijon, France; N= 149	PMAQ (Paterson ‘99); 4 items; DI: 100% (nonadherent score<4)	Combined: 4 days and 4 weeks		VL reduction; OR_A 2.9 (95% CI 1.2–7.1); Did not miss any PI last 4 days r = . 18*
Duran et al. (2001)	Study cohort; France; N = 277	AACTG; 5 items; DI:100%	Combined: 4 days and weekend		VL undetectable 4 months after ART initiation 59.4% vs. 41.6%**
Duran et al. (2001)	Study cohort; France; N= 57	N/R; 1 item; CT: 100%, 99%-80%, <80%	1 week		VL median log₁₀ 100%: 2.3 (2.3–3.5); 80%–99%: 2.3 (2.3–3.6); <80%: 3.8 (2.6–5.04); VL undetectable 100%: 73.1%; 80%–99%: 69.2%; <80%: 22.2%; CD4 (NS, p = 0.06); drug level***
Duran et al. (2003)	47 hospitals; France; N = 642	N/R; 5 items; CT: 100%, 99%-80%, <80%	4 days		VL detectable; 100%: OR 1.0; 99%–80%: OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.0–2.3); <80%: OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.3–4.1)
Eldred, Wu, Chaisson, and Moore (1998)	Hospital HIV clinic; Baltimore, MD, USA; N = 244	N/R; 1 item for each time frame; DI: 80%	7 days; 14 days	Medical record kappa 71%; 7 day: 60% vs. 56% (NS); 14 day: 74% vs. 67%**
Fong et al. (2003)	HIV clinic; Hong Kong; N=161	N/R; Number missed doses; DI: 100%	Since last visit		VL<500; OR_A 4.2 (95% CI 1.8–12.3)
Gao et al. (2000)	3 clinics; West Virginia, US; N = 72	Samet ‘92; N/R, assessed doses; CO: prescribed – missed/prescribed	2 days		Disease severity*
Garcia de Olalla et al. (2002)	HIV hospital unit; Barcelona, Spain; N= 1219	N/R; N/R; DI: 90%	1 month		Mortality: Non adherent; Relative hazard 1.5 (95% CI 1.2–1.99)
Gifford et al. (2000)	Community practices; San Diego CA, US; N= 133	CASQ (Berry ‘00) 4 items per drug taken; CT: 100%, 80–99%, <80%	7 days		VL log₁₀ Each increase in adherence category associated with 1.3 log₁₀ decrease**
Giordano, Guzman, Clark, Charlebois, and Bangsberg (2004)	Participants’ usual place of residence; San Francisco, CA,US; N=84	AACTG and Visual Analog Scale - VAS (Walsh ‘98); 4 items/drug (3 day), VAS-1; CO: Mean adherence over three visits	3 days (AACTG) 3 or 4 weeks (VAS)	Unannounced PC and VAS: r = 0.76(95%CI 0.65–0.84); 3-day r = 0.71 (95% CI 0.59–0.80); (sig. N/R; NS diff betw VAS and 3 day)	VL; VAS: r= − .49 (95% CI − .0.64–0.31); 3-day r= –.34 (95% CI −0.51–0.13); (sig. N/R; NS diff betw VAS and 3 day)
Godin, Gagne, and Naccache (2003)	4 HIV clinics; Montreal, Quebec City; N = 256	Researcher-created; 9 items, # pills missed/# prescribed; DI: 95%	1,2,7,30 days		VL increase over 6 months; Nonadherent 1, 2, 30 day (NS); 7 days OR 1.9 (95% CI 1.0–3.6)
Golin et al. (2002)	3 public HIV clinics; N/R; N=117	Composite score with EDM, PC, SR interview (Liu’01) 1 item CO: #doses taken/# prescribed	7 days	EDM r = 0.38 (sig. N/R); PC r = 0.62 (sig. N/R)
Gordillo, del Amo, Soriano, and Gonzalez-Lahoz (1999)	HIV reference center; Madrid, Spain; N = 366	N/R; N/R; DI: 90%	Last week		CD4 at enrollment and good adherence; >500 OR_A 2.4 (95% CI 1.3–4.4); 200–499 OR_A 2.8 (95% CI 1.4–5.5)
Goujard et al. (2003)	Hospital centers; France; N = 326	AACTG, PMAQ, and 3 items re: instructions (Metcalf ‘98) 13 items; CO: Nonadherence score 0–26	N/R		VL lower (test statistics N/R)*** CD4 higher (test statistics N/R)*
Guaraldi et al. (2003)	8 tertiary centers; Northern, Central Italy; N= 175	MOS-HIV Health Survey N/R; 85% (>1 dose in 7 days)	7 days	Morphologic alterations; OR_A 2.36 (95% CI 1.1–5.0)
Haubrich et al. (1999)	5 university HIV clinics; CA, US; N = 164 @ 2 months, 119 @ 6 months	N/R 24 items; assessed % prescribed doses taken; CT: 100%, 99-95%, <95-80%, <80%	4 weeks	Provider estimate kappa = 0.02 (NS)	VL log₁₀ reduction (SD) @ 2 months* 100%, 99-95%, <95-80%, <80%; 0.95 (2.2); 0.79 (2.0); 0.57 (1.8); 0.04 (2.0); VL log₁₀ increase (SD) @ 6 months* 100%: − 1.1 (2.2); <80%: 0.2 (1.2); CD4 cells @ 6 months** 100%, 99-95%, <95-80%, <80% 72 (162); + 87 (154); + 54 (162); − 19 (74)
Ho et al. (2002)	Clinic; Hong Kong; N= 161	Doung ‘01 1 item, % prescribed doses taken CT: 100%, 99–95%, 94-90%, <90%	4–6 weeks		VL detectable ≤ 99% vs. 100% OR 4.2 (95% CI 1.8–12.3) Disease progression
Horne et al. (2004)	Outpatient clinic; Brighton, UK; N=109	VAS 1 item, correct dose timing; DI: 7 pt scale 0–6: cutoff ≥ 5	N/R		VL>400; 18% vs. 26% (NS); CD4 (NS)
Hugen et al. (2002)	University centre; Nijmegen and Arnhem Netherlands; N = 26	N/R; VAS; Multiple items; CT: 3 groups and range 1–10	N/R	EDM % taken on time* ρ = .73; % taken ρ = .55	N/R
Ickovics et al. (2002)	21 AACTG sites; Multisites, US; N = 93	AACTG 1 item for each drug DI: 95%	4 days		VL>50 @ 24 weeks <95% adherent OR 2.6 (95% CI 1.1–6.1) CD4 change (NS)
Ingersoll (2004)	University ID clinic; Virginia; N= 120	Medication Adherence Form (Ingersoll ‘99) Multiple items; DI: 95% PIs taken; DI: Adherence score 1–3, cutoff >2	1 week		VL undetectable 77% vs. 23%* CD4 <200 54% vs. 46%*
Kimmerling et al. (2003)	Clinics, community; Los Angeles, US; N= 58	N/R # doses taken q.d. of last 3; CO: score	3 days	EDM: r = 0.47*** Subset reporting missed doses (NS)
Kleeberger et al. (2001)	Research cohort; Baltimore, Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, US;N = 393	Modified AACTG; multiple items; DI: 100%	4 days		VL undetectable <50 copies; 53.3% vs. 37.4%** CD4 ≥ 400 (NS); 64.4% vs. 58.3%
Knobel et al. (2001)	University HIV clinic; Barcelona, Spain; N = 679	N/R; N/R; DI: 90%	1 month		VL <500; Adherent OR 3.1 (95% CI 2.2–4.2)*; nonadherent OR_A 0.4 (95% CI 0.2–0.7); CD4 mean increase 171 vs. 107**
Knobel et al. (2001)	69 hospitals; Spain; N = 2528@3,2127@6, and 1797 @ 12 months	SMAQ (from Morisky ‘86); 6 items; DI: 95% (missed >2days in 3 mos; 2 doses 7 days or yes to 1/4 items)	Combined 1 weekend; 1 week; 3 months	EDM: sensitivity 72%; specificity 91%; PPV 91%; NPV 80%	VL <500; @ 3 months OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.8–2.6)*; @ 6 months OR 2.6 (95% CI 2.2–3.1); @ 12 months OR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0–3.1)**; VL >500; Nonadherent OR_A 1.7 (95% CI 1.4–2.1)
Knobel et al. (2004)	2 hospitals; Barcelona, Spain; N= 85	SMAQ (from Morisky ‘86); 6 items; DI: 90%	1 weekend; 1 week; 3 months		VL >500 @ first year: Nonadherent OR 5.2 (95% CI 2.1–13.3); OR_A 4.4 (95% CI 1.6–12.3)
Laniece et al. (2003)	3 health clinics; Dakar, Senegal; N =158	N/R; N/R; # taken: #prescribed; DI: 90%	30 days		VL mean difference nonadherent; Month 18: 1.7 log₁₀ copies; Month 24: 1.8 log₁₀ copies
Le Moing et al. (2001)	47 clinical centers; Paris/France; N=750	N/R; N/R; DI: 100%	4 days		VL <500: 84% vs. 73%***; OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.3–3.0)
Le Moing et al. (2002)	47 clinical centers; France; N=1129	N/R; 5 items; categorical: 100%, 80–99%, <80%	4 days		VL rebound = VL>500; 27% high adher. HR = 0.4 (95% CI 0.3–0.6)*; 34% moderate adher. HR = 0.6 (95% CI 0.4–0.8); 53% low adher. HR= 1.0
Liu et al. (2001)	Public HIV clinic; N/R; N=108	N/R; 2 items, composite adherence score; CO: mean	1 week	EDM r = 0.38*; PR: r = 0.62*	VL <400 vs. VL>400 mean adherence 8 week (NS), 24 week* 0.97 (0.85–0.96) vs. 0.90(0.85 −0.96)
Lopez-Suarez, Fernandez-Gutierrez del Almo, Perez-Guzman, and Giron-Gonzalez (1998)	N/R; Cadiz, Spain; N = 65	N/R; N/R; DI: 80%	N/R		VL log₁₀, 2 drug/3 drug regimen; 3 months: 2.9 vs. 4.4**/3.6 vs. 4.9; 6 months: 3.1 vs. 4.5**/3.3 vs. 4.8; CD4, 2 drug/3 drug regimen; 3 months: 550 vs. 356**/405 vs. 333; 6 months: 567 vs. 416**/540 vs. 400
Lucas, Cheever, Chaisson, and Moore (2001)	Johns Hopkins AIDS Service; Baltimore, MD, US; N = 533	N/R; N/R; DI: missed >2 doses in 2 weeks	2 weeks		VL log₁₀ difference 0.4 (0.2–0.7); CD₄ cell difference − .12 (−40-15) (sig. N/R)
Maggiolo et al. (2002)	Outpatient clinic; Bergamo, Italy; N= 597	Modified AACTG (Chesney ‘00); N/R; DI: 100%	90 days		VL<50; 75.6 vs. 55.3%***
Mannheimer et al. (2002)	18 CPCRA Sites; US; N=1095	CPCRA (Form 646, ‘02); N/R; CT: 100%, 80–99%, <80%	7 days		VL log₁₀ decrease*; 100%: 2.8, 80–99: 2.3, <80%: 0.7; CD4 increase*; 100%: 179, 80–99: 159, <80%: 53
Martin et al. (2001)	Hospital HIV unit; Madrid, Spain; N =242	N/R; 4 items, # of pills delivered/prescribed	6 days	SR vs. PR; 80% adherence cutoff: sens = 25%, spec = 86%, PPV = 49%, positive likelihood ratio (LR) = 1.8; 90% adherence: sens = 19%, spec = 84%, PPV = 58%, positive LR = 1.2
Martin-Fernandez et al.(2001)	HIV unit; Madrid, Spain; N = 283	Tuldra ‘99; 2 items: Capable (1–5, cutoff <4); Effort (100 pt scale, cutoff < = 36); Pharmacy refill = gold standard; DI: 95%	N/R	Area under curve of measure; Capable 0.61 (0.54–0.67); Effort 0.64 (0.57–0.70). Concordance between negative response on 2 SR to PR kappa 0.25 (0.13–0.36)
Mathews et al. (2002)	University HIV Clinic; San Diego, CA, US; N= 175	Modified AACTG (Chesney ‘00); 5 items; DI: Score 0–33 cutoff 5	30 days	EDM ρ= −0.40 (sig. N/R)	VL log₁₀ difference; 1 month: .04, 3 month: 1.1, 6 month: 1.3; VL undetectable; CD4*; plasma level ρ= − .0.48 (sig. N/R)
Melbourne et al. (1999)	Physician offices; Providence, RI, US; N = 44	N/R; N/R; CO: mean %	1 month	SR (SD) vs. EDM (SD); 1 month: 98% (3.6) vs. 90% (14); 2 month: 96% (5) vs. 90% (12.6)
Moatti et al. (2000)	Hospitals; Marseilles, Avigon, Nice, Paris, France; N=164	N/R; N/R; DI: 80%	7 days		VL median log₁₀ (range)*; 2.7 (2.3–5.6) vs. 3.9 (2.3–5.8); VL undetectable or decrease >1 log₁₀ 57% vs. 40.3%; CD4 median increase (NS); disease progression (NS)
Murri et al. (2001)	University HIV clinic; Rome, Italy; N= 140	Researcher-created; 16 items; DI: forgot 1 dose vs. >1 dose in 3 days	1 day; 3 days		VL detectable; nonadherent 3 days; OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.0–4.7); Plasma level PI 1 day: OR 15.9 (95% CI 4.9–50.7), 3 day: OR 4.4 (95% CI 1.7–11.9)
Nieuwkerk et al. (2001)	14 hospitals; The Netherlands, Belgium; N=160	Researcher-created 3 items; DI: 100%	7 days	PC measure for saquinavir*; PC measure for ritonavir (NS)	VL>400 @ 48 weeks; nonadherent 40%, adherent 15%*
Nieuwkerk et al. (2001)	22 hospitals; The Netherlands; N= 224	Researcher-created 4 items; DI: 100%	7 days		VL>500; nonadherent OR 2.1 (95% CI 0.9–1.9); nonadherent OR_A 4.0 (95% CI 1.4–11.6); drug level median concentration (range) 1.1 (0.6–1.4) vs. 0.8 (0.51.1)***
Oyugi et al. (2004)	Research-affiliated clinics and hospitals; Kampala, Uganda; N= 34	AACTG (Chesney ‘00) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS); N/R; CO: Mean	3 days (AACTG): 30 day (VAS)	EDM 3 day r = 0.87*;VAS 0.77; PC 3 day r = 0.89; VAS 0.86; 3 day and VAS r = 0.82**	VL < 400 @ 12 weeks; 3-day r=- 0.42*; 30-day VAS r= − .036
Palepu, Horton, Tibbetts, Meli, and Samet (2004)	Medical and methadone clinics, respite facility; Boston, MA, US; N= 194	N/R; N/R; DI: 95%; CO: Mean	30 days		VL log₁₀ mean (SD); 1.8 (1.8) vs. 2.7 (1.9)**; CD4 mean (SD)*; 414 (254) vs. 375 (216) (NS)
Pinheiro et al. (2002)	Public clinic; Pelotas, Brazil; N=195	Researcher-created; N/R; DI: 95%	2 days		VL <500; 67.5% vs. 31.5%**; CDC disease stage (NS)*
Pradier et al. (2001)	Research cohort: 12 outpatient hospitals in Marseilles, Avigon, Nice, and Paris, France; N = 119	N/R; 1 item for each medication; DI: 100% 3 groups: (1) no VL change or <0.5 decrease, (2) > 0.5 decrease but still detectable, (3) undetectable	7 days		VL log₁₀; G3 vs. G2 = OR_A 5.8 (95% CI 1.5–22.1); G3 vs. Gl = OR_A 5.6 (95% CI 1.3–24.7)
Raboud et al. (2002)	N/R; Italy, The Netherlands, Canada, and Australia; N = 311	INC AS, AVANTI 2 and 3 studies; N/R; DI: Adherence from 3 different studies which each dichotomized differently 92.3, 75, 75%	28 days	PC (N/R)	Virologic failure; RR 3.0 (95% CI 1.4–6.1); Test statistics NR for the following: Virologic suppression; Triple drug, double drug (NS); VL undetectable *
Schuman et al. (2001)	Research cohort; Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, New York, LA, Wash. DC, US; N = 371	N/R; 1 item; DI: 75%	2 weeks		VL undetectable; OR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8–8.5); CD4 ≥ 200; OR 2.1 (95% CI 1.0–4.3)*
Silveira et al. (2002)	HIV/AIDS service; Pelotas, Brazil; N = 244	N/R; 1 item (# tablets taken); CT: ≥ 95%, 94-80%, 79-60%, <60%	48 hr		VL <80 across groups OR ≥ 95%: OR 5.5 (95% CI 2.6–11.9); 60–79%: OR 4.2 (95% CI 1.3–.3); 80%–%: OR 5.6 (95% CI 2.2–.1); <60%: 1.0
Spire et al. (2002)	Research cohort, 47 hospitals, France; N = 445	N/R; 3 items; DI: 100%	4 days		VL log₁₀ median decrease @ 4 months; 1.7 vs. 1.3*; VL ≤ 500 77% vs. 60%*
Trotta et al. (2003)	Research cohorts; Rome and other sites, Italy; N= 596	Murri ‘00; 16 items; DI: 86% (missed ≥ 1 dose last 7 days)	7 days		VL ≤ 500; nonadherent OR 0.7 (95% CI 0.5–.9); CD4 <200/mm; OR 0.6 (95% CI 0.3–.0,p = .06)
Vincke and Bolton (2002)	N/R; Belgium; N= 86	PI attitude scale (Weiss N/R) 3 items Ordinal: scale (1–, 5: excellent)	4 weeks	Clinician: r= −0.25 (NS); Significant other: r= −0.42**	VL; R = 0.30 (sig. N/R)
Wagner et al. (2001)	3 VA Medical Centers; Cleveland, OH, Houston, TX, Manhattan, NY, US; N = 793	N/R; 4 items; CT: 0 (poor), 1, 2 (perfect)	4 days	SR and provider agreement; kappa -.03, (-.09,.03) (NS)	VL <400; 55% vs. 36% vs. 22%*; OR_A 0.9 (95% CI 0.8–.3); VL median 141 vs. 393 vs. 1679*; OR_A 0.04 (95% CI −0.2-0.1)
Wagner, 2002	CBOs, clinics; Los Angeles, USA; N= 180	Modified AACTG (Chesney ‘00) N/R; CO: Mean	3 days	4-week EDM: r = 0.34**
Wagner et al, 2003	Mental health community; LA,CA, US; N = 47	N/R; N/R; CO: Means	3 days; 2 weeks	EDM 3 days* r = 0.61;2 weeks* r = 0.63	VL log₁₀ r = − .0.39* (recall period N/R); VL log₁₀ mean (SD); 3 day: 2.3 log₁₀ (1.0) vs. 3.5 log₁₀ (1.2)**; CD4 3 days (NS); 14 days (NS)
Walsh etal. (2001)	Publicly funded clinic; N/R; N=178	Researcher-created; N/R; CO: Median	30 day and VAS (30 days)	PR ρ = 0.19; Nurse rating ρ = 0.51; MD rating ρ = 0.33**¶
Walsh et al. (2002)	Public HIV clinic; London, England; N= 78	AACTG (Chesney ‘00), Hecht ‘98, Fletcher ‘79; 6 items: 3 −3day; 1–2 week, 1 last missed; VAS 30 day (0–%); CO: Mean	3 day; 2 weeks; 30 day (VAS)	EDM: Univariate linear regression; 3 day r = 0.32; 0.68 (95% CI 0.23–1.13); 2 week r = 0.62; 1.21(95% CI 0.86–.56); VAS r = 63; 1.09 (95% CI 0.78–1.39)**	VL<50; 3 day (NS); 14 day ρ = − .0.30; VAS ρ = −0.28
Weiser et al. (2003)	3 private clinics; Gaborone, Francistown, Botswana; N = 93–109	Modified AACTG (Chesney ‘00); N/R; DI: 95%	1 year	SR and provider agreement; Kappa = .35,x² =11.13***
Wutoh et al. (2001)	2 large HIV clinics; Washington DC, US; N=100	N/R; N/R; CO: Mean	7 days		VL mean; ρ =.−312**

Notes. N/R: Not reported, NS: Non-significant, ID: Infectious disease, SD: Standard deviation, PI: Protease inhibitor.

Odds ratios, hazard ratios, and relative risks are unadjusted unless denoted by subscript “A”; 95% confidence intervals denote significance unless only a p-value is given.

Correlation statistics are Pearson’s r or Spearman’s ρ.

Significance level was calculated from data provided in the article using a 1 sample test of proportion.

Significance level was calculated from data provided in the article using a 1 sample t-test.***