What studies use the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS) to assess patient adherence to medication regimens?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: August 1, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Studies Using the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS)

The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS) has been used in numerous studies across multiple disease conditions to assess patient adherence to medication regimens, with validated versions in multiple languages showing good reliability and validity.

Overview of MARS Versions and Validation

The MARS exists in multiple versions, with MARS-5 being one of the most commonly used:

  • MARS-5: A 5-item version that demonstrates acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.67-0.89) and validity across multiple patient populations 1
  • MARS-D: German translation with satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.60-0.69) and test-retest reliability (r=0.61-0.63) 2
  • MARS Arabic version: Validated through factor analysis with good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.89-0.93) 3
  • MARS for psychosis: 10-item version specifically for patients with psychosis, showing moderate to weak concurrent validity with clinician ratings 4

Disease Conditions Where MARS Has Been Used

MARS has been validated and used across numerous chronic conditions:

  • Hypertension: Shows criterion-related validity with blood pressure control (better adherence correlates with better BP control) 1
  • Diabetes: Used to assess adherence in diabetic patients 1
  • Asthma: Validated for use in respiratory conditions 1
  • Psychosis/Schizophrenia: 10-item version specifically developed and validated 4
  • Multiple chronic conditions: The MAR-Scale (Medication Adherence Reasons Scale), a related 20-item comprehensive scale, has been validated across 17 distinct chronic disease conditions including multiple sclerosis (Cronbach's alpha 0.861) and psoriasis (Cronbach's alpha 0.973) 5

Key Features of MARS as a Measurement Tool

MARS offers several advantages as a medication adherence assessment tool:

  • Self-reported measure: Provides patient perspective on medication-taking behavior
  • Brevity: The 5-item version (MARS-5) is quick to administer
  • Psychometric properties: Shows acceptable internal reliability and test-retest reliability
  • Construct validity: Demonstrates relationship with beliefs about medicines, with higher adherence associated with stronger beliefs in treatment necessity and lower treatment concerns 1

Methodological Considerations When Using MARS

When using MARS in research, several methodological considerations should be noted:

  • Reporting consistency: The European Society for Patient Adherence (ESPACOMP) developed the ESPACOMP Medication Adherence Reporting Guideline (EMERGE) to standardize reporting of medication adherence research 6
  • Adherence phases: Consider which phase of adherence (initiation, implementation, persistence) is being measured 6
  • Triangulation: Using multiple methods to capture adherence provides more reliable estimates than single methods 6
  • Patient characteristics: Socio-demographic characteristics may influence MARS scores, with higher reported adherence for older patients and those taking more medications 2

Common Reasons for Non-Adherence Identified Using MARS

Studies using MARS and related scales have identified common reasons for non-adherence across conditions:

  • "Simply missed it" (forgetfulness)
  • Concerns about side effects
  • Concerns about long-term effects of medications 5

MARS provides researchers and clinicians with a validated tool to identify these barriers to adherence, which can then be targeted through interventions.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.