The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Medication adherence plays an important role in optimizing the outcomes of many treatment and preventive regimens in chronic illness. Self-report is the most common method for assessing adherence behavior in research and clinical care, but there are questions about its validity and precision. The NIH Adherence Network assembled a panel of adherence research experts working across various chronic illnesses to review selfreport medication adherence measures and research on their validity. Self-report medication adherence measures vary substantially in their question phrasing, recall periods, and response items. Self-reports tend to overestimate adherence behavior compared with other assessment methods and generally have high specificity but low sensitivity. Most evidence indicates that self-report adherence measures show moderate correspondence to other adherence measures and can significantly predict clinical outcomes. The quality of self-report adherence measures may be enhanced through efforts to use validated scales, assess the proper construct, improve estimation, facilitate recall, reduce social desirability bias, and employ technologic delivery. Self-report medication adherence measures can provide actionable information despite their limitations. They are preferred when speed, efficiency, and low-cost measures are required, as is often the case in clinical care. KeywordsAdherence, Compliance, Self-management, Medication, Self-report Valid measurement of medication adherence plays a crucial role in healthcare and health research. When a patient is not benefiting from a medication regimen, clinicians need sound adherence information to determine whether the medication is ineffective or not being taken as prescribed. Assessing medication adherence during routine clinical care can further ensure that individuals in need of adherence support interventions receive them, ideally before deleterious outcomes occur. In the context of clinical research, proper interpretation of proof-of-concept trials testing new pharmacologic regimens requires valid adherence data, because any null findings may stem from poor adherence rather than a lack of drug efficacy. Research designed to understand and promote medication adherence also requires precise methods of adherence assessment.Among many approaches to assessing medication adherence, patient self-report measures remain the most common method [1][2][3][4][5][6]. These measures are defined by asking respondents to characterize their medication adherence behavior. Self-report measures of medication adherence range from simple singleitem questions regarding missed doses to complex multi-item assessments that incorporate reasons for nonadherence [7]. The widespread use of self-report adherence measures in clinical care and research reflects their low cost and ease of implementation across a large variety of medication regimens.There are two primary challenges related to selfreport measures of medication adherence. ImplicationsPractice: Routine assessment of medication...

Self-management of chronic pediatric conditions is a formidable challenge for patients, families, and clinicians, with research demonstrating a high prevalence of poor self-management and nonadherence across pediatric conditions. Nevertheless, effective self-management is necessary to maximize treatment efficacy and clinical outcomes and to reduce unnecessary health care utilization and costs. However, this complex behavior is poorly understood as a result of insufficient definitions, reliance on condition-specific and/or adult models of self-management, failure to consider the multitude of factors that influence patient self-management behavior, and lack of synthesis of research, clinical practice, and policy implications. To address this need, we present a comprehensive conceptual model of pediatric self-management that articulates the individual, family, community, and health care system level influences that impact self-management behavior through cognitive, emotional, and social processes. This model further describes the relationship among self-management, adherence, and outcomes at both the patient and system level. Implications for research, clinical practice, and health care policy concerning pediatric chronic care are emphasized with a particular focus on modifiable influences, evidence-based targets for intervention, and the role of clinicians in the provision of self-management support. We anticipate that this unified conceptual approach will equip stakeholders in pediatric health care to (1) develop evidence-based interventions to improve self-management, (2) design programs aimed at preventing the development of poor self-management behaviors, and (3) inform health care policy that will ultimately improve the health and psychosocial outcomes of children with chronic conditions.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

No abstract