Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Pharmacology›Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS)
Process / pipelineself-efficacy

Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS)

Also known as: SEAMS

The Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS) is a brief self-report measure designed to assess patients' confidence in their ability to manage medications appropriately across diverse contexts and challenges. Grounded in Bandura's self-efficacy theory, the SEAMS evaluates patients' perceived capacity to adhere to medication regimens despite potential barriers—forgetfulness, side effects, cost constraints, complexity, or changes in routine. The scale has demonstrated strong predictive validity for medication adherence and clinical outcomes in hypertension, diabetes, asthma, and other chronic diseases, making it valuable for identifying patients with low medication management confidence who need additional support.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale
Beliefs about Medicines…Medication Adherence Rat…Medication Understanding…Treatment Satisfaction Q…Drug Attitude Inventory

When to use it

The SEAMS is appropriate for any patient on chronic medication, particularly those facing complex regimens, significant life disruptions (job changes, travel, caregiver transitions), or cognitive/organizational challenges. It is especially valuable in populations with low health literacy, elderly patients with multiple medications, patients with ADHD or memory concerns, and those managing medication in unstable environments. The SEAMS is used in clinical practice to identify patients at risk of non-adherence due to low self-efficacy (as opposed to knowledge deficits or attitudinal barriers) and to guide selection of support strategies. It is also used in research to understand how self-efficacy mediates the relationship between adherence barriers and actual non-adherence.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Theoretically grounded: Based on Bandura's well-validated self-efficacy theory; captures a psychologically meaningful predictor of adherence behavior.
  • Context-specific assessment: Measures confidence across diverse situations (at home, away, when routine changes), providing nuanced understanding of where support is needed.
  • Predicts adherence and outcomes: Multiple studies show SEAMS score correlates with actual medication adherence, blood pressure control, glycemic control, and other clinical outcomes.
  • Identifies modifiable target: Self-efficacy can be improved through mastery experiences (successfully taking medications), vicarious learning (observing others), verbal persuasion (supportive counseling), and reducing anxiety. SEAMS guides these interventions.
  • Brief and practical: 8–13 items completed in 5 minutes; suitable for clinical practice.
Limitations
  • Self-report bias: Patients may overestimate confidence in hypothetical situations; actual behavior in real-world contexts may differ.
  • Does not assess actual adherence: High self-efficacy predicts but does not guarantee adherence; practical barriers (cost, access) may intervene.
  • Limited assessment of specific barriers: SEAMS measures global confidence but may not identify specific obstacles (e.g., 'I can't afford the copay' or 'My insulin injection is physically painful').
  • Variation in instrument versions: Different SEAMS versions (8-item, 13-item, adapted versions) complicate comparability across studies.
  • May overestimate likelihood of adherence in patients with impaired insight: A patient with poor insight may rate high self-efficacy despite demonstrated poor medication management.

Frequently asked

A patient scores high on SEAMS but admits they often forget to take medications. How do I reconcile this?

This suggests a discrepancy between perceived ability and actual performance. Possible explanations: (1) the patient overestimated confidence (self-report bias), (2) the patient has good general confidence but specific triggers for forgetfulness (e.g., skips doses when traveling despite confidence at home), (3) forgetfulness is due to cognitive impairment beyond their awareness or control. Explore with concrete questions: 'Tell me about a time last week when you forgot—what was happening?' Identify specific contexts and then implement targeted solutions (electronic reminders, pill organizer, linking doses to daily routines).

Is SEAMS the same as health literacy?

No. Health literacy is knowledge and understanding of health concepts. Self-efficacy is confidence in one's ability to perform a behavior. A patient may be health literate (understand that medication is important and know how to take it correctly) but have low self-efficacy (lack confidence they can actually remember to take it consistently). Both are important for adherence, but they address different barriers and require different interventions. Health literacy gaps need education; self-efficacy gaps need practical support and confidence-building.

How do I build self-efficacy in a patient with low SEAMS?

Use strategies grounded in self-efficacy theory: (1) Mastery experiences—start with simplest possible regimen (e.g., one once-daily medication); as the patient successfully manages it, gradually add complexity. Each successful experience builds confidence. (2) Vicarious learning—introduce the patient to peers managing similar medication regimens; their success increases the patient's belief in their own capacity. (3) Verbal persuasion—provide specific, encouraging feedback: 'You've now taken this medication every day for two weeks—that's great progress.' (4) Reduce anxiety—identify and address fears (e.g., fear of injections, fear of side effects) through education, exposure, or support. (5) Practical support—provide pill organizers, reminders, simplified regimens, family involvement.

Can low SEAMS predict which medication management strategy will work best?

Partially. A patient with low SEAMS for 'remembering medications' likely benefits from reminders or simplification. A patient with low SEAMS for 'managing when routine changes' needs flexibility in their support strategy (e.g., emergency supply, travel kit). However, SEAMS alone does not determine the optimal strategy; combine SEAMS with barrier assessment, patient preference, and practical constraints (cost, access, complexity) to select the best approach.

Sources

  1. Ogedegbe, G., Schoenthaler, A., & Richardson, T. (2007). An Exploration of Contextual Factors and Antihypertensive Medication Adherence in Hypertensive African Americans. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 64(23), 2510-2516. (SEAMS adapted from original research on self-efficacy in medication adherence.) link ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/pharmacology/self-efficacy-medication-adherence

Related methods

Beliefs about Medicines QuestionnaireMedication Adherence Rating ScaleMedication Understanding and Use Self-Efficacy ScaleTreatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Beliefs about Medicines QuestionnairePharmacology↔ compare
  • Medication Adherence Rating ScalePharmacology↔ compare
  • Medication Understanding and Use Self-Efficacy ScalePharmacology↔ compare
  • Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for MedicationPharmacology↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Beliefs about Medicines QuestionnaireDrug Attitude InventoryMedication Adherence Rating ScaleMedication Understanding and Use Self-Efficacy ScaleTreatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication

Similar methods

Medication Understanding and Use Self-Efficacy ScaleDiabetes Self-Efficacy ScaleExercise Self-Efficacy ScaleDASESMorisky Medication Adherence ScaleBeliefs about Medicines QuestionnaireGeneral Self-Efficacy ScaleYoga Self-Efficacy Scale

Related reference concepts

Compliance Strategies and Behavior ChangeMedication Adherence and EducationMedication Adherence: Definition, Measurement, and Assessment MethodsMedication Adherence and OptimizationDisease Self-Management ProgramsAdherence Barriers, Facilitators, and Root-Cause Analysis

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (Self-Efficacy for Appropriate Medication Use Scale (SEAMS)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/pharmacology/self-efficacy-medication-adherence · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Gbenga Ogedegbe, Antoinette Schoenthaler, and colleagues
Subfamily
self-efficacy
Year
2007
Type
Self-report
Related methods
Beliefs about Medicines QuestionnaireMedication Adherence Rating ScaleMedication Understanding and Use Self-Efficacy ScaleTreatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account